More stories

  • in

    Can Macron Lead the European Union After Merkel Retires?

    Emmanuel Macron, the French president, would love to fill the German chancellor’s shoes. But a Europe with no single, central figure may be more likely.PARIS — After Germans vote on Sunday and a new government is formed, Chancellor Angela Merkel will leave office after 16 years as the dominant figure in European politics. It is the moment that Emmanuel Macron, the French president, has been waiting for.The German chancellor, though credited for navigating multiple crises, was long criticized for lacking strategic vision. Mr. Macron, whose more swaggering style has sometimes ruffled his European partners — and Washington — has put forward ideas for a more independent and integrated Europe, better able to act in its own defense and its own interests.But as the Anglo-American “betrayal” in the Australian submarine affair has underscored, Mr. Macron sometimes possesses ambitions beyond his reach. Despite the vacuum Ms. Merkel leaves, a Macron era is unlikely to be born.Instead, analysts say, the European Union is heading for a period of prolonged uncertainty and potential weakness, if not necessarily drift. No one figure — not even Mr. Macron, or a new German chancellor — will be as influential as Ms. Merkel was at her strongest, an authoritative, well-briefed leader who quietly managed compromise and built consensus among a long list of louder and more ideological colleagues.That raises the prospect of paralysis or of Europe muddling through its challenges — on what to do about an increasingly indifferent America, on China and Russia, and on trade and technology — or even of a more dangerous fracturing of the bloc’s always tentative unity.And it will mean that Mr. Macron, who is himself up for re-election in April and absorbed in that uncertain campaign, will need to wait for a German government that may not be in place until January or longer, and then work closely with a weaker German chancellor.“We’ll have a weak German chancellor on top of a larger, less unified coalition,’’ said Mujtaba Rahman, managing director for Europe of the Eurasia Group, a political risk consultancy. “A weaker chancellor is less capable of exerting influence in Europe, and then with the Macron election, the political cycles of these two key countries will not be in sync.”Campaign posters this month in Berlin showing the top candidates for chancellor: Olaf Scholz, Armin Laschet and Annalena Baerbock.Filip Singer/EPA, via ShutterstockThe uncertainty is likely to last until after the French parliamentary elections in June — and that’s presuming Mr. Macron wins.Mr. Macron has argued forcefully that Europe must do more to protect its own interests in a world where China is rising and the United States is focusing on Asia. His officials are already trying to prepare the ground on some key issues, looking forward to January, when France takes over the rotating European Union presidency. But given the likelihood of lengthy coalition talks in Germany, the window for accomplishment is narrow.Mr. Macron will need German help. While France and Germany together can no longer run the European Union by themselves, when they agree, they tend to bring the rest of the bloc along with them.So building a relationship with the new German chancellor, even a weaker one, will be a primary goal for Mr. Macron. He must be careful, noted Daniela Schwarzer, executive director for Europe and Eurasia of the Open Societies Foundations, not to scare off the Germans.“Macron’s leadership is disruptive, and the German style is to change institutions incrementally,” she said. “Both sides will need to think through how they make it possible for the other side to answer constructively.’’French officials understand that substantive change will be slow, and they will want to build on initiatives already underway, like the analysis of Europe’s interests called “the strategic compass” and a modest but steady increase in military spending on new capabilities through the new European Defense Fund and a program called Pesco, intended to promote joint projects and European interoperability.After the humiliation of the scuttled submarine deal, when Australia suddenly canceled a contract with France and chose a deal with Britain and the United States instead, many of his European colleagues are more likely now to agree with Mr. Macron that Europe must be less dependent on Washington and spend at least a little more in its own defense.Few in Europe, though, want to permanently damage ties with the Americans and NATO.“Italy wants a stronger Europe, OK, but in NATO — we’re not on the French page on that,” said Marta Dassu, a former Italian deputy foreign minister and director of European affairs at the Aspen Institute.Troops from a European tank battalion that consists of Dutch and German soldiers.Laetitia Vancon for The New York TimesMario Draghi, the Italian prime minister, whose voice is respected in Brussels, believes strongly in the trans-Atlantic relationship, she said, adding: “We’re closer to Germany than to France, but without all the ambiguities on Russia and China.’’France also wants to become more assertive using the economic and financial tools Europe already has, especially trade and technology, the officials say. The point, they say, is not to push too hard too fast, but to raise the European game vis-à-vis China and the United States, and try to encourage a culture that is comfortable with power.But France’s German partners will themselves be going through a period of uncertainty and transition. A new German chancellor is expected to win only a quarter of the vote, and may need to negotiate a coalition agreement among three different political parties. That is expected to take at least until Christmas, if not longer.The new chancellor will also need to get up to speed on European issues, which barely surfaced in the campaign, and build credibility as the newcomer among 26 other leaders.“So it’s important now to start thinking of concrete French-German wins during a French presidency that Macron can use in a positive way in his campaign,” Ms. Schwarzer said. “Because Berlin does not want to ponder a scenario in which Macron loses” to the far-right Marine Le Pen or in which Euro-skeptics like Matteo Salvini take over in Italy.Whoever wins, German policy toward Europe will remain roughly the same from a country deeply committed to E.U. ideals, cautious and wanting to preserve stability and unity. The real question is whether any European leader can be the cohesive force Ms. Merkel was — and if not, what it will mean for the continent’s future.“Merkel herself was important in keeping the E.U. together,” said Ulrich Speck of the German Marshall Fund. “She kept in mind the interests of so many in Europe, especially Central Europe but also Italy, so that everyone could be kept on board.’’Ms. Merkel saw the European Union as the core of her policy, said a senior European official, who called her the guardian of true E.U. values, willing to bend to keep the bloc together, as evidenced by her support for collective debt, previously a German red line, to fund the coronavirus recovery fund.“Merkel acted as mediator when there have been a lot of centrifugal forces weakening Europe,’’ said Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff, head of the Berlin office of the German Marshall Fund. “It’s less clear how the next chancellor will position himself or herself and Germany.’’Still, Mark Leonard, director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, noted that “whoever is the chancellor, Germany is still responsible for more than half of Chinese trade with Europe.’’ Germany is “vastly more important than the other countries on all the big issues, from how to handle China to the tech wars and climate change,’’ he said.President Xi Jinping of China, upper left, and European leaders discussing an investment deal last year.Pool photo by Johanna GeronThat means Mr. Macron “knows he has to channel German power behind his vision,’’ he said.But French and Italian positions will be crucial, too, on important pending financial issues, like fiscal and banking integration, trying to complete the single market and monitoring the pandemic recovery fund.Ms. Merkel’s departure may provide an opportunity for the kinds of change Mr. Macron desires, even if in vastly scaled-down version. Ms. Merkel’s love of the status quo, some analysts argue, was anachronistic at a time when Europe faces so many challenges.Perhaps most important is the looming debate about whether to alter Europe’s spending rules, which in practical terms means getting agreement from countries to spend more on everything from defense to climate.The real problem is that fundamental change would require a treaty change, said Guntram Wolff, director of Bruegel, a Brussels research institution. “You can’t have fiscal and defense integration by stealth,’’ he said. “It won’t have legitimacy and won’t be accepted by citizens.’’But the German election debates ignored these broad issues, he said.“The sad news,” Mr. Wolff said, “is that none of the three chancellor candidates campaigned on any of this, so my baseline expectation is continued muddling forward.” More

  • in

    Merkel’s Children: Living Legacies Called Angela, Angie and Sometimes Merkel

    For some refugee families who traveled to Germany during the migrant crisis of 2015 and 2016, gratitude for Chancellor Angela Merkel’s decision to welcome them comes via a namesake.WÜLFRATH, Germany — Hibaja Maai gave birth three days after arriving in Germany.She had fled the bombs that destroyed her home in Syria and crossed the black waters of the Mediterranean on a rickety boat with her three young children. In Greece, a doctor urged her to stay put, but she pressed on, through Macedonia, Serbia, Hungary and Austria. Only after she had crossed the border into Bavaria did she relax and almost immediately go into labor.“It’s a girl,” the doctor said when he handed her the newborn bundle.There was no question in Ms. Maai’s mind what her daughter’s name would be.“We are calling her Angela,” she told her husband, who had fled six months earlier and was reunited with his family two days before little Angela’s birth on Feb. 1, 2016.“Angela Merkel saved our lives,” Ms. Maai said in a recent interview in her new hometown, Wülfrath, in northwestern Germany. “She gave us a roof over our heads, and she gave a future to our children. We love her like a mother.”Chancellor Angela Merkel is stepping down after her replacement is chosen following Germany’s Sept. 26 election. Her decision to welcome more than a million refugees from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere in 2015 and 2016 stands as perhaps the most consequential moment of her 16 years in power.It changed Europe, changed Germany, and above all changed the lives of those seeking refuge, a debt acknowledged by families who named their newborn children after her in gratitude.The chancellor has no children of her own. But in different corners of Germany, there are now 5- and 6-year-old girls (and some boys) who carry variations of her name — Angela, Angie, Merkel and even Angela Merkel. How many is impossible to say. The New York Times has identified nine, but social workers suggest there could be far more, each of them now calling Germany home.Migrants arriving at a registration tent in Berlin in 2015. Ms. Merkel’s decision to welcome more than a million refugees in 2015 and 2016 stands as perhaps the most consequential moment of her 16 years in power.Gordon Welters for The New York Times“She will only eat German food!” said Ms. Maai of little Angela, now 5.The fall of 2015 was an extraordinary moment of compassion and redemption for the country that committed the Holocaust. Many Germans call it their “fall fairy tale.” But it also set off years of populist blowback, emboldening illiberal leaders like Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary and catapulting a far-right party into Germany’s own Parliament for the first time since World War II.Today, European border guards are using force against migrants. Refugee camps linger in squalor. And European leaders pay Turkey and Libya to stop those in need from attempting the journey at all. During the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan, a chorus of Europeans was quick to assert that refugees would not be welcome on the continent.“There are two stories here: One is a success story, and one is a story of terrible failure,” said Gerald Knaus, the founding chairman of the European Stability Initiative, who informally advised Ms. Merkel on migration for over a decade. “Merkel did the right thing in Germany. But she lost the issue in Europe.”The Guardian AngelaHaving fled war, torture and chaos in Syria, Mhmad and Widad now live on Sunshine Street in the western German city of Gelsenkirchen. In their third-floor living room, a close-up of Ms. Merkel’s smiling face is the screen saver on the large flat-screen television, a constant presence.“She is our guardian angel,” said Widad, a 35-year-old mother of six, who asked that she and her family members be identified only by their first names to protect relatives in Syria. “Angela Merkel did something big, something beautiful, something Arabic leaders did not do for us.”“We have nothing to pay her back,” she added. “So we named our daughter after her.”Angela, or Angie as her parents call her, is now 5. An animated girl with large hazel eyes and cascading curls, Angie loves to tell stories, in German, with her five siblings. Her sister Haddia, 13, wants to be a dentist. Fatima, 11, loves math.“There is no difference between boys and girls in school here and that is good,” Widad said. “I hope Angie will grow up to be like Ms. Merkel: a strong woman with a big heart.”The arrival of nearly one million refugees shook Germany, even as Ms. Merkel rallied the nation with a simple pledge: “We can manage this.” Like many others, Widad and her family were granted subsidiary protection status, in 2017, which allows them to stay and work in Germany. In three years, they will apply for German citizenship.The latest government statistics show that migrants who arrived in 2015 and 2016 are steadily integrating into German society. One in two have jobs. More than 65,000 are enrolled either in university or apprenticeship programs. Three in four live in their own apartments or houses and say they feel “welcome” or “very welcome.”During the pandemic, refugees sewed masks and volunteered to go shopping for elderly Germans isolated at home. During the recent floods in western Germany, refugees drove to the devastated areas to help clean up.Angie, right, loves to tell stories, in German, with her five siblings. Lena Mucha for The New York Times“They come to me and say they want to give something back,” said Marwan Mohamed, a social worker in Gelsenkirchen for the Catholic charity Caritas.Widad, who was an English teacher in Syria, recently got her driver’s license, is taking German lessons and hopes to eventually return to teaching. Her husband, who had a plumbing business in Syria, is studying for a German exam in October so that he can then start an apprenticeship and ultimately be certified as a plumber. For now, the family receives about 1,400 euros, about $1,650, a month in state benefits.In Wülfrath, Tamer Al Abdi, the husband of Ms. Maai and father of Angela, has been laying paving stones and working for a local metal company since he passed his German exams in 2018. He recently created his own decorating business, while his wife wants to train as a hair dresser.When Ms. Maai brought baby Angela to be registered at a nursery, she could barely speak German, said Veronika Engel, the head teacher.“Angela? Like Angela Merkel?” Ms. Engel had asked.“Yes,” Ms. Maai had beamed back.Her family was the first of 30 refugee families whose children joined the nursery.Tamer Al Abdi, who has a daughter named Angela, after Chancellor Merkel, has recently created his own decorating business, after passing his German exams in 2018. Lena Mucha for The New York TimesOne boy would not allow the door to be closed, Ms. Engel recalled, while another could not bear loud noises. Angela’s older sister Aria, who was 5 when they fled Syria, became scared during a treasure hunt in the forest because it brought back memories of how her family hid from thugs and border guards during their journey through Central Europe.“These are children traumatized from war,” Ms. Engel said. “The resilience of these families is admirable. We are a richer country for it.”A vicar’s daughter, Ms. Merkel grew up behind the Iron Curtain in Communist East Germany, a background that has profoundly impacted her politics.“She was clear: We won’t build new borders in Europe. She lived half her life behind one,” recalled Thomas de Maizière, who served as Ms. Merkel’s interior minister during the migrant crisis.‘You Got Unlucky’Not everyone has agreed. The migration crisis unleashed an angry backlash, especially in Ms. Merkel’s native former East Germany. This is where Berthe Mballa settled in 2015. She had been sent to the eastern city of Eberswalde by German migration officials, who used a formula to distribute asylum seekers across the country.“The East is bad,” one immigration lawyer told her. “You got unlucky.”In 2013, Ms. Mballa fled violence in Cameroon with a map of the world and the equivalent of 20 euros. She had to leave behind two young children, one of whom has since gone missing, and the trauma is so searing that she cannot bring herself to speak of it.The first time she had ever heard Angela Merkel’s name was on the Moroccan-Spanish border.“The Europeans had built big fences so the Africans wouldn’t come in,” she recalled. “I saw the people on the African side shouting her name, hundreds of them, ‘Merkel, Merkel, Merkel.’”Since settling in Eberswalde, Ms. Mballa has been insulted on the street and spat at on a bus. Ms. Merkel is loathed by many voters in this region, yet Ms. Mballa did not hesitate to name her son, born after she arrived in Germany, “Christ Merkel” — “because Merkel is my savior.”“One day my son will ask me why he is called Merkel,” she said. “When he is bigger, I will tell him my whole story, how hard it was, how I suffered, the pregnancy, my arrival here, the hope and the love that this woman gave me.”A refugee held a picture of Ms. Merkel at a train station in Munich in 2015.Christof Stache/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesToday, Germany and the rest of Europe have stopped welcoming refugees. Politicians in Ms. Merkel’s own party have reacted to the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan by declaring that “2015 mustn’t repeat itself.” In Gelsenkirchen, Widad and her husband, Mhmad, have been treated well but realize that times have changed.“Who will lead Germany?” Mhmad asked. “What will happen to us when she is gone?”Ms. Mballa also worries. But she believes that naming her son after Ms. Merkel, if a small gesture, is one way to keep the chancellor’s legacy alive.“Our children will tell their children the story of their names,” Ms. Mballa said. “And, who knows, maybe among the grandchildren there will even be one who will run this country with that memory in mind.” More

  • in

    ‘Stab in the back’: France hits out at Aukus alliance with fears it threatens Indo-Pacific partnerships

    France has hit out at Australia’s decision to abandon a £43bn deal for French submarines in favour of a new security pact.The French government reacted angrily to news Australia, the UK and the US have entered an alliance that will involve building a nuclear-powered submarine fleet and wide-ranging projects on cyber warfare, artificial intelligence and quantum computing.Jean-Yves Le Drian, France’s foreign affairs minister, claimed the move was a “stab in the back” from Australia, telling Franceinfo: “We had established a trusting relationship with Australia, and this trust was betrayed.”The EU’s high representative, Josep Borrell said the bloc had not been consulted on the security pact, even as Brussels unveiled its own Indo-Pacific strategy.He said the decision by the Australian government to abandon the submarine deal with France meant that it was important for the EU to build its own approach to the region.“We must survive on our own, as others do,” Borrell said as he presented the strategy, talking of the importance of “strategic autonomy” “I understand the extent to which the French government must be disappointed.” However, British prime minister Boris Johnson insisted the UK’s relationship with France was “rock solid” when asked in parliament on Thursday.The so-called Aukus deal has also angered China, which accused the trio of “severely damaging regional peace and stability, intensifying an arms race, and damaging international nuclear non-proliferation efforts”.Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said countries should not build partnerships that target third countries and that China would “closely watch the situation’s development”.The move has been widely interpreted as an attempt to check China’s growing military assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific.However, the prime minister insisted Britain’s new defence pact was not intended as an “adversarial” move against China.He told the House of Commons: “It merely reflects the close relationship that we have with the United States and with Australia, the shared values that we have and the sheer level of trust between us that enables us to go to this extraordinary extent of sharing nuclear technology in the way that we are proposing to do.“It is true that that this is a huge increase in the levels of trust between the UK, the US and Australia.“It is a fantastic defence technology partnership that we are building – but it is not actually revolutionary.”Downing Street declined to comment on the collapsed Australian contract for conventional subs, saying this was a matter between Paris and Canberra.The prime minister’s official spokesperson added: “We continue to have a very close relationship with France, we have long standing security and defence relationships with France.“We have members of the armed forces working side by side right now and that will continue to be the case.”The spokesperson said defence secretary Ben Wallace had been in contact with his French counterpart, but there were no plans for a phone call between Boris Johnson and French president Emmanuel Macron.He confirmed the Aukus deal was discussed by Mr Johnson with US president Joe Biden and Australian prime minister Scott Morrison in a three-way meeting at the G7 summit in Cornwall in June, but played down suggestions this was the decisive moment in the agreement, which he said had been “an undertaking of several months”.Mr Johnson’s spokesperson suggested the UK’s ability to seal the deal could be regarded as a benefit from Brexit.“We are able to move in this in this way now that we’re not part of the European Union, and that is to the benefit of the British people,” he said.The UK’s commitment to Nato remained unchanged by the Aukus deal, he said.And he rejected suggestions it might undermine the “Five Eyes” intelligence relationship by creating an “inner circle” of three members while excluding Canada and New Zealand.The EU’s strategy will focus on trade, greater digital cooperation with Japan, South Korea and Singapore, support for climate change initiatives and a greater diplomatic presence to uphold the United Nations Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). It also plans to collaborate with Japan, India and Australia on transport links, in particular in the aviation and maritime industry, to link the bloc more closely to Asia.This comes after the EU on Wednesday launched a new plan to rival China’s Belt and Road infrastructure strategy, which it calls “Global Gateway”An 18-month process will now take place to consider technical and practical aspects of the AUKUS plan, and work out precise details of where work will be undertaken and jobs created, said the spokesperson.But he said there would be “extensive work” in the UK, creating “hundreds and hundreds” of jobs and generating tens of billions of investment over the lifetime of the project.Additional reporting by agencies More

  • in

    EU’s former Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier demands French ‘sovereignty’ from European courts

    The EU’s former Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier stunned ex-colleagues in Brussels by launching a blistering attack on the power of the European courts.Mr Barnier – who is running for the French presidency against Emmanuel Macron – said it was time for France to “regain sovereignty” lost to the European judiciary.The politician who negotiated the Brexit deal on behalf of Brussels appears to have adopted Eurosceptic rhetoric in his bid to win the presidency for the centre-right Republicans.“We must regain our legal sovereignty in order to no longer be subjected to the judgements of the European Court of Justice or the European Court of Human Rights,” the former EU Commissioner said on Thursday.Mr Barnier repeated his call for a referendum to impose a five-year moratorium on immigration to France from outside the EU. “We will propose a referendum in September 2022 on the question of immigration,” he told a rally in Nimes.Mr Barnier later issued a tweet attempting to clarify his rally remarks – saying he did not want France to break entirely free of the European courts but to create a “constitutional shield” to give the country more power over immigration issues.“Let us keep calm,” the presidential candidate also tweeted, claiming he wanted to “avoid any unnecessary controversy”.While some found Mr Barnier’s remarks “ironic” – given his stance defence of freedom of movement during the Brexit process – others said he was in danger of “destroying his legacy”.“One wonders how a sentence like that can come from such a committed European,” Clément Beaune, France’s junior minister for EU affairs, told Politico on his latest remarks.Julien Hoez from the European Liberal Forum said: “Michel Barnier is giving a masterclass on how to destroy your career and legacy in the desperate hope of looking electable to an electorate that just straight up dislikes you regardless.”The 70-year-old Republican candidate, who left the EU Commission in March, was one of the most prominent faces of the Brexit negotiations and regularly criticised Brexiteers in the Conservative Party.Responding to his attack on the European courts, Conservative MP Simon Clarke tweeted: “This is ironic in the extreme.”Polls in France have next year’s contest as a race between incumbent Mr Macron and far-right National Rally candidate Marine Le Pen.But Mr Barnier is hoping to make a strong showing in the first round of the contest, which is scheduled for April 2022. More

  • in

    ‘Tensions rising’: How French media reported on Priti Patel’s migrant boat plan

    French media has highlighted rising tensions between France and the UK as it reported on Priti Patel’s new plan to push migrant boats back across the Channel. Both countries have become embroiled in a war of words over efforts to tackle migrants crossing the Channel by boat.France has “strongly rejected” the latest tactic reportedly sanctioned by Ms Patel, which would redirect migrant boats in the Channel back to France, according to Le Monde.The leading national newspaper called migrant crossings a “subject that sours relations between Paris and London” and said the French interior minister, Gerald Darmanin, had “upped the ante” with a tweet on the matter on Thursday. “France won’t accept any practice against maritime law, nor any financial blackmail,” Mr Darmanin wrote, adding that the friendship between France and UK “deserves better than stances that hurt co-operation between our departments”.Ms Patel told her French counterpart this week the British public “expect to see results” from French efforts to prevent ongoing migrant crossings. She is also to have told MPs she is prepared to withhold millions of pounds of cash promised to France to help step up patrols unless an improvement in the number of migrants intercepted by French authorities is seenLe Figaro, another major, right-leaning French newspaper, said the UK has accused France of not sufficiently preventing migrant crossings for years. “London wants to put the breaks on illegal immigration. Gerald Darmanin warns of a ‘practice against maritime law,’ the newspaper said in a report on the UK’s plans to push boats back across the Channel. “Tensions between France and the UK rise while Channel crossings increase,” France Info, a radio network, reported. In a round-up on European news, the outlet said the UK was “infuriated” by the number of migrants coming from France. Sud-Ouest, a regional newspaper, said things were “heating up” between London and Paris, following the French response to Ms Patel’s plans to push back boats. Meanwhile Le Parisien reported that the UK wanted to make French authorities “responsible” for migrants in the Channel, wherever they are found. According to reports, Ms Patel has ordered officials to rewrite maritime laws to allow Border Force to turn boats around, forcing them to be dealt with by French authorities.Several newspapers reported that members of Border Force are being given special training to handle migrant boats, but would only deploy the “pushback” tactics when deemed practical and safe to do so.Reports suggested such operations were likely to be restricted to sturdier, bigger migrant boats and only used in “very limited circumstances”.A Home Office spokesperson said: “We do not routinely comment on maritime operational activity.” More

  • in

    Tony Blair’s Stand-Up Number

    Is there any reason to pay attention to what Tony Blair, the British prime minister between 1997 and 2007, has to say after the Afghan debacle? The former member of the comedy duo, composed of George W. Bush (the inarticulate gaffer) and Blair (the sanctimonious moralizer), that performed prominently on the world stage in the first decade of this century, no longer has any serious connection to political power. Still, Blair manages to make occasional appearances in the news cycle, thanks principally to the inertia that so relentlessly drives the media’s choices.

    Now that the war the Bush and Blair team enthusiastically launched in 2001 has been officially lost, the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) was curious to hear what the former leader might have to say. Would Blair offer some insider perspective on an episode of history now judged to have been a vainglorious attempt to punish a spectacular criminal act by mounting a military campaign that turned out to be more spectacular, equally criminal, much more costly and far more self-destructive of the civilization that was presumably defending itself? Would he apologize for his own mistakes? Would he coldly analyze the political and ideological sources of those mistakes?

    The Media Embrace the Martyrdom of Afghan Women

    READ MORE

    Blair did admit that “maybe my generation of leaders were naive in thinking countries could be remade.” That was neither a confession nor an apology, especially as he immediately followed up by implicitly critiquing President Joe Biden’s precipitated withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, adding that “maybe the remaking needed to last longer.” He then used the now obligatory example of the plight of Afghan women to assert that “we mustn’t forget … that our values are still those which free people choose.”

    Instead of confessing and clarifying, the monologue he delivered resembled a self-parody of the reasoning that drove his error-ridden decision-making in 2001. “Islamism,” he proclaimed, “both the ideology and the violence, is a first order security threat… COVID-19 has taught us about deadly pathogens. Bio-terror possibilities may seem like the realm of science fiction, but we would be wise now to prepare for their potential use by non-state actors.” In short, once again, we need to be afraid, very afraid.

    Today’s Daily Devil’s Dictionary definition:

    Potential use:

    A term used by politicians to describe an unlikely event that usefully inspires fear in the public’s mind to justify aggressive efforts labeled “defense,” but which objectively appear to take the form of offensive assault against other nations and peoples

    Contextual Note

    In such moments, Blair can appear as if he is vying to become a stand-up comedian, a kind of one-man Monty Python, satirizing his nation’s historical institutions. Unfortunately, despite Blair’s notoriety, they are not in the same league. The Flying Circus boys came together initially as irreverent university wits, who targeted post-colonial British culture and the pompous establishment’s status quo. As the former living symbol of that pompous establishment, Blair’s comic ambition is fraught with insurmountable obstacles. Even when his discourse manages to sound as surreally unhinged as that of any of the characters invented by the Python, Blair will never break free from his former identity as the real-life representative of the establishment’s fake wisdom and pseudo-sanity.

    Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

    In the later years of his reign as the young and glamorous prime minister, even before the devastating findings of the Chilcot report on the UK’s involvement in the Iraq War, many politically aware Brits were already tempted to change the spelling of his name from Blair to Bliar, to highlight his habit of solemnly lying his way into disastrous wars, alongside his buddy, President Bush. Together, those two men led an enterprise that some observers assess as a complex and long-enduring war crime.

    That both of those men should still be welcomed on the world stage, treated as sages and counted on to deliver wise commentary on current events should shock only those who are unaware of how today’s media works. It systematically honors those who have been the boldest in committing crimes, so long as such crimes are committed in the name of national security. That rationale has become so fundamental and so obsessively inculcated by those who exercise any form of political or economic power that committing extreme violence in the name of “national security” will always be lauded in the media as proof of a politician’s courage to go beyond the call of duty. 

    Historical Note

    Tony Blair’s comedy appears to be based on a simple premise. His onstage character assumes the stance of taking seriously the startling idea formulated in 1989 by Francis Fukuyama, as the Cold War was ending. According to the young political scientist, a golden age governed by the principles of Western liberalism was dawning. Fukuyama claimed that “we are witnessing… the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.”

    Fukuyama himself eventually abandoned that thesis or at least corrected our understanding of what he meant by it. Blair thinks we can return to 1992, a year in which the book, “The End of History and the Last Man” was published and the Soviet Union only existed in the past tense. In his secular preaching, Blair maintains the faith in the triumph of liberal values. “Recovering confidence in our values and in their universal application,” he affirmed, “is a necessary part of ensuring we stand up for them and are prepared to defend them.”

    Blair’s forward-looking aims at new battlegrounds. “Britain should work more closely with European countries on how best to develop capacity to tackle the threat in areas such as Africa’s Sahel region,” he said. This stands as a scintillating demonstration of how the neocolonialist mind works. It seeks a region of interest and then invents the threat. 

    Why is Blair singling out the Sahel? The answer should be obvious. It is the logic used by 19th-century European colonialist powers, who opportunistically looked for occasions to exploit the weakness of their rivals to dominate a particular part of the world. France is currently retreating from its futile engagement in the Sahel, an area it dominated to a large extent as a colonial power and in which it has been active as a neocolonial defender in the “global war on terror.”

    Embed from Getty Images

    Blair’s plan reads like a comic book version of traditional British imperialism. “We need some boots on the ground,” he said. “Naturally our preference is for the boots to be local, but that will not always be possible.” Let the natives die as we secure our rule. It is already laughable to suggest that Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s post-Brexit Britain might “work more closely with European countries” on its relations with the African continent.

    Blair is obviously thinking of a tandem with France, whose citizens have lost all patience with their nation’s inept military operation across the Sahel region. He imagines France and Britain together renewing the glory formerly achieved by the US-UK duo in the Middle East. Together they will ensure that the “remaking” lasts longer. France’s Jupiterian president, Emmanuel Macron, humiliated by the current pressure to withdraw troops, would clearly welcome the chance of participating in such an alliance, even if the French people are reticent.

    For Blair, it isn’t about power and money, though he is clearly attracted to both, especially the latter, which he has shown a talent for accumulating. No, it’s about universal values, Blair’s own singularly enlightened values. That’s a language dear to the president of the French Republic, a nation that has tirelessly sought to exercise its “mission civilisatrice” across the globe for the last three centuries. Blair, the stand-up comedian, will “stand up for” those values and be “prepared to defend them.”

    “Be prepared” is the Boy Scouts’ motto. In the final act of Shakespeare’s “Hamlet,” the young prince of Denmark declared to his friend Horatio that “the readiness is all.” Unlike Blair, however, Hamlet wasn’t interested in magnifying real or imaginary threats to his well-being. Instead, he was affirming a certain equanimity and trust in his own capacities. No need to invest in his training before what turned out to be a rigged fencing match. Hamlet refused to let fear be his guide.

    From the beginning of Shakespeare’s play, Denmark was in a state of war, feverishly building its armaments to defend itself from a “hot and full” Norwegian prince, Fortinbras. But it was Denmark’s own criminal king who brought the country down, leaving bodies strewn across the stage just as the young Fortinbras is about to arrive, survey the damage and take control of the state.

    *[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The Daily Devil’s Dictionary on Fair Observer.]

    The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

  • in

    Olaf Scholz Is Running as the Next Angela Merkel in Germany, and It Seems to Be Working

    Mr. Scholz, a Social Democrat who is modeling himself as the candidate of continuity, has a fair shot at being Germany’s next chancellor.BERLIN — When Olaf Scholz asked his fellow Social Democrats to nominate him as their candidate for chancellor, some inside his own camp publicly wondered if the party should bother fielding a candidate at all. Germany’s oldest party was not just trailing Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservatives but had slipped into third place behind the Greens with a humiliating 14 percent in the polls. As recently as June, the German media was framing the contest to succeed Ms. Merkel as a two-way race between her conservatives and the ascendant Green Party.But with the Sept. 26 national elections fast approaching, Mr. Scholz and his once-moribund party have unexpectedly become the favorites to lead the next government in Europe’s biggest democracy.“It’s really touching to see how many citizens trust me to be the next chancellor,” a beaming Mr. Scholz told hundreds of supporters at a recent campaign event in Berlin, as he stood in front of a giant screen proclaiming: “Scholz will tackle it.”Ten months after Joseph R. Biden Jr. won the U.S. presidency for the Democrats, there is a real chance that Germany will be led by a center-left chancellor for the first time in 16 years. Not since the second term of former President Bill Clinton have both the White House and the German chancellery been in the hands of center-left leaders.“The atmosphere is just amazing right now — we’re almost in disbelief,” said Annika Klose, who is a Social Democrat candidate for Parliament and watched Mr. Scholz speak. “Since I joined the party in 2011, every election result was worse than the last.”With 25 percent in recent polls, Mr. Scholz’s Social Democrats have overtaken both the Green Party and the conservative party of Chancellor Angela Merkel.Gordon Welters for The New York TimesIt’s not that Germans have suddenly shifted left. Mr. Scholz, who has served as Ms. Merkel’s finance minister and vice chancellor for the past four years, is in many ways more associated with the conservative-led coalition government than his own party. Two years ago, he lost the party’s leadership contest to a leftist duo, which attacked him for his moderate centrism.But Mr. Scholz has managed to turn what has long been the main liability for his party — co-governing as junior partners of Ms. Merkel’s conservatives — into his main asset: In an election with no incumbent, he has styled himself as the incumbent — or as the closest thing there is to Ms. Merkel.“Germans aren’t a very change-friendly people, and the departure of Angela Merkel is basically enough change for them,” said Christiane Hoffmann, a prominent political observer and journalist. “They’re most likely to trust the candidate who promises that the transition is as easy as possible.”With 25 percent in recent polls, Mr. Scholz’s Social Democrats have overtaken the Greens, now lagging at 17 percent, and the conservatives at barely over 20 percent. But political analysts point out that this would hardly constitute a convincing victory.“No one has ever become chancellor since 1949 with so little trust,” said Manfred Güllner, head of the Forsa polling institute, referring to the founding year of the Federal Republic of Germany after World War II.“German voters are quite unsettled,” Mr. Güllner added. “After 16 years of a Merkel chancellorship that provided a certain sense of stability, we’re in a place we’ve never been before.”On the campaign trail Mr. Scholz has spoken admiringly of the current chancellor. A slickly produced TV ad by the party shows him walking in front of a projected image of Ms. Merkel. Mr. Scholz with Ms. Merkel in August. On the campaign trail Mr. Scholz has spoken admiringly of her. Maja Hitij/Getty ImagesHe has been photographed making the chancellor’s hallmark diamond-shaped hand gesture — the “Merkel rhombus” — and used the female form of the German word for chancellor on a campaign poster to convince Germans that he could continue Ms. Merkel’s work even though he is a man.The symbolism isn’t subtle, but it is working — so well in fact that the chancellor herself has felt compelled to push back on it — most recently in what might be her last speech in the Bundestag.Mr. Güllner, the pollster, said at least part of the recent surge in support for the Social Democrats comes from Merkel voters who are not happy with her party’s candidate, Armin Laschet, a conservative state governor who has repeatedly fumbled on the campaign trail. “There is no real Scholz enthusiasm in Germany,” said Ms. Hoffmann. “His success is due primarily to the weakness of the other candidates.”Unlike his rivals, Mr. Scholz hasn’t put a foot wrong in the campaign. He takes few risks and is controlled to the point that Germans have dubbed him the “Scholz-o-mat” — or “Scholz machine.” Sticking to his message of stability has also made it harder for his opponents to attack him on past blunders, although some have tried. As mayor of Hamburg he took private meetings with a banker seeking a million euro tax deferment, an episode that has become part of a state investigation, and it was on his watch as finance minister that the fraudulent German fintech company Wirecard imploded.But this has barely surfaced in the campaign. Instead, Mr. Scholz’s popularity has continued to rise. Mr. Scholz was a socialist in the 1970s who gradually mellowed into a post-ideological centrist. First defending workers as a labor lawyer, then defending painful labor-market reforms and now co-governing with a conservative chancellor, his journey in many ways tracks that of his party.In its 158-year-history the Social Democrats have been a formidable political force, fighting for workers’ rights, battling fascism and helping to shape Germany’s postwar welfare state. But after serving three terms as junior partners to Ms. Merkel, the party’s vote share had halved.Unlike his rivals, Mr. Scholz hasn’t put a foot wrong in the campaign. He takes few risks and is controlled to the point that Germans have dubbed him the “Scholz-o-mat” — or “Scholz machine.” Gordon Welters for The New York TimesGerhard Schröder, the last Social Democrat to become chancellor, won 39 percent of the vote in 2002. In 2005, when the Social Democrats entered their first coalition with Ms. Merkel, they were still winning 34 percent of votes; by 2017 that had shrunk to 20 percent.But even as his party sank to a postwar low, Mr. Scholz became one of Germany’s most popular politicians. It helped that as finance minister he controlled the government’s purse strings during the pandemic. After years of religiously sticking to Germany’s cherished balanced budget rule, he promised to bring out the “bazooka” to help businesses survive the pandemic, initially spending 353 billion euros, or about $417 billion, in recovery and assistance funds.“Scholz has zero charisma but he radiates stability — and he handed out the money in the economic crisis,” said Andrea Römmele, dean of the Berlin-based Hertie School of Governance. If current polls hold, the Social Democrats will finish first but will need two other parties to form a governing coalition. One would almost certainly be the Greens. As for the other, Mr. Scholz has all but ruled out the far-left Left Party, which would leave either the conservatives or — more likely — the free-market Liberal Democrats.Mr. Scholz has offered some ideas on how he would govern differently, but the changes are relatively modest and might be further watered down by his coalition partners, analysts predict.Mr. Scholz, who has served as Ms. Merkel’s finance minister and vice chancellor for the past four years, is in many ways more associated with the conservative-led coalition government than his own party. Gordon Welters for The New York TimesHe has tried to woo his party’s core working-class voters by using “Respect” as one of his main campaign slogans. In his stump speech, he emphasizes that people who earn as much as him should not get tax breaks. Instead, he wants to lower taxes for middle- and low-income earners and raise them modestly for those with incomes of more than 100,000 euros a year.He promises to raise the minimum wage to 12 euros an hour (instead of the current 9.60 euros), build 400,000 homes a year (instead of the about 300,000 built in 2020) and pass a raft of climate measures, though without getting out of coal before 2038.“We would not expect changes in taxes and spending to add up to a big additional fiscal stimulus,” wrote Holger Schmieding, chief economist for Berenberg Bank in a recent analysis of what a Scholz chancellorship would mean for financial markets. In a coalition with the Greens and the Liberals, he predicted, “the pragmatic Scholz himself would likely rein in the leftist inclinations” of his own party base.Only the conservatives, desperately under pressure, have been arguing the opposite.Even Ms. Merkel, who had said she wanted to stay out of the race, has recently felt compelled to distance herself from Mr. Scholz’s unabashed attempts to run as her clone.There is “an enormous difference for the future of Germany between him and me,” Ms. Merkel said. More

  • in

    Right Think: Jane Austen Against Terrorism

    A creative British judge has demonstrated how judgments in criminal cases need not be about meting out humiliating, painful punishment to the guilty. In the case of 21-year-old Ben John, accused of acts identifying him as a “terror risk,” the punishment prescribed by Judge Timothy Spencer QC consists essentially of reading works by Charles Dickens, Jane Austen, William Shakespeare, Anthony Trollope and Thomas Hardy. John will return to court three times a year “to be tested on his reading.”

    Ben John’s crime consisted of downloading exactly 67,788 documents that appeal to right-wing terrorists. Call it downloading with intent to read. According to the BBC, “He was arrested in January 2020 and later charged with offenses under the Terrorism Act, including possessing documents on combat, homemade weapons and explosives.” To be clear, he didn’t actually possess weapons and explosives, merely documents about them. According to John’s attorney, even the prosecution didn’t believe he was planning a terrorist attack. 

    The Musical Is Political: Black Metal and the Extreme Right

    READ MORE

    Understanding the diminished nature of the threat, alongside the fact that he technically did violate a modern law that some complain encourages abuse by law enforcement, the judge gave this account of John’s taste in downloading: “It is repellent, this content, to any right-thinking person. This material is largely relating to Nazi, fascist and Adolf Hitler-inspired ideology.”

    Today’s Daily Devil’s Dictionary definition:

    Right-thinking person:

    Someone who understands the importance of limiting their thinking not only to approved topics but also to approved takes on those topics while accepting to make a concerted effort not to let their thinking wander into unsavory areas

    Contextual Note

    Britain is a nation and a culture that lives and breathes through its awareness of its centuries-old traditions. The idea of “right-thinking” cannot be defined by any law, but instead of being discarded, as it would be in the US, thanks to the British perception of the weight of its inherited culture, the concept can be credibly invoked in a courtroom and even figure in a verdict. Judge Spencer apparently believes the key to becoming a right-thinking citizen is to practice being a right-reading citizen. A clear-headed judge in the US applying the same logic would impose reading the law, not works of fiction.

    Judge Spencer understands that knowing the law isn’t enough. Thinking like a good Englishman requires familiarity with great English writers of the past. And it must be the past. In his list there is no Martin Amis, Ali Smith, Ian MacEwan or even 20th modernists such as Virginia Woolf, Joyce Cary or D.H. Lawrence. Right-thinking English society reached its pinnacle more than a century ago.

    Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

    It stopped evolving at the beginning of the 20th century, by which time all British citizens were expected to understand at least that part of a dying empire’s heritage. This judgment reveals that the nostalgia for a society of the queen’s right-thinking subjects remains a powerful cultural force in British society.

    John’s lawyer described his client’s character as “a young man who struggled with emotions; however, he is plainly an intelligent young man and now has a greater insight.” Perhaps the judge expects that John’s reading of great works from the past will inspire him to become a writer himself, making him not only right-thinking but even an active contributor to the perpetuation of the literary tradition that defines the nation’s greatness. John may even be inspired to take up writing his own dramatic story. Instead of engaging in the crime of downloading with intent, he may start uploading with creative ambition. 

    This legal episode may leave the reader of the article with the impression that the judge regrets not having pursued a vocation in academia and is using the opportunity to hone his skills as a literature teacher. On that score, Judge Spencer may risk falling into the trap of the great British tradition of imitating a cast of despotic, if not sadistic headmasters and superintendents, on the model of Dickens’ Thomas Gradgrind in “Hard Times.”

    Embed from Getty Images

    There is a hint of Dickensian severity in Spencer’s formulation of the young man’s sentence: “On 4 January you will tell me what you have read and I will test you on it. I will test you and if I think you are [lying to] me you will suffer.” But unlike Gradgrind — who condemned “fancy” (“You are never to fancy”) and promoted “fact, fact, fact” — by imposing fiction, Spencer may even be encouraging the development of John’s fancy, so long as it stays close to what right-thinking people fancy.

    John’s barrister, Harry Bentley, reassured the judge: “He is by no means a lost cause and is capable of living a normal, pro-social life.” The term “pro-social” should be taken as a synonym of “right-thinking,” which means not “Nazi, fascist and Adolf Hitler-inspired.”

    Historical Note

    The judge mentioned some specific titles of works that John will be expected to read, all of them works that belong to the prestigious history of English literature. Judge Spencer gave this specific instruction: “Start with Pride and Prejudice and Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities. Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night. Think about Hardy. Think about Trollope.” Apart from Shakespeare, these are all 19th-century writers. In their works, they describe the material, social and economic conflicts that concerned people living in a world that has little in common with today’s reality.

    These novels reflect in different ways the impact of the momentous change as a formerly rural society was overturned by industrialization. Is it reasonable to think a young extremist of the 21st century will be able to learn from such examples?

    Embed from Getty Images

    We are left wondering at what the chosen titles mean for the judge himself and what impact he expects them to have on the man accused of terrorist tendencies. Will the preoccupations of a destitute gentry in the early 19th century in “Pride and Prejudice” provoke some epiphany for the young man? Will the absurdly melodramatic pseudo-political events Dickens situates during the French Revolution in “The Tale of Two Cities” clarify his ideas about radical politics?

    Does the judge expect that the subtle confusion about a twin playing at reversing her gender role in Shakespeare’s sublime comedy will effectively educate John on the subtleties of sexual identity and help him to nuance his opinions on homosexuality?

    Depending on how he conducts the discussion sessions around the convicted man’s readings, the magistrate may be creating a precedent that is worth imitating in other cases of individuals with terrorist inclinations. Calling great writers of the past as witnesses of what right-thinking people believe will at least rob such individuals of the time they would dedicate to reading downloaded extremist literature. It’s a question not of fighting fire with fire, but with comforting warmth. 

    There is a problem, however. Understanding what Shakespeare, Austen, Dickens and others had to say requires delving into the history of their times and the modes of thought that accompanied those times. We might even wonder how right-thinking these authors were. Shakespeare in particular left hints that he wasn’t very fond of the oppressive order he was living under. His form of protest was not to download instructions provided by Guy Fawkes (who did attempt to blow up Parliament), but the texts of his tragedies that indirectly express his doubts about the existing political order.

    Embed from Getty Images

    For Shakespeare, something was rotten in England as well as Denmark, and the time was clearly out of joint. He carefully avoided appearing too subversive from fear of the temporal power that would inevitably accuse him under the Elizabethan version of the Terror Act.

    Judge Spencer has nevertheless defined a noble course of action in this particular case. Let us hope that he is up to the task as a teacher. If he does succeed, we should recommend his example for handling future cases of intelligent individuals so disturbed by the reigning hypocrisy that they become ready to embrace ideas pointing in the direction of terrorism. Given the constant degradation of our political culture and of the trust people are willing to put in our political leaders and the justice system itself, such examples in the near future are likely to be legion. 

    *[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The Daily Devil’s Dictionary on Fair Observer.]

    The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More