Diplomacy & Crisis News

Accédez à l’article de Jana Jabbour ici.

Retrouvez le sommaire du numéro 4/2020 de Politique étrangère ici.

The military brass in Yangon never relinquished control.

Violent extremism in the United States demands a social response.

A Washington, le 9 août, le ministère de la justice annonçait que 49 % des 16 500 victimes de meurtres en 2005 aux Etats-Unis étaient afro-américaines. Les Noirs ne représentent pourtant que 12,8 % de la population. Moins protégés du crime, ils le sont aussi de la pauvreté (ils constituent 32 % du (...) / États-Unis (affaires intérieures), Femmes, Inégalités, Minorité nationale, Droits des minorités, Afro-Américains, Santé, Violence, Université - 2007/09

Un extrait remonté de « Lune l'envers », une bande dessinée d'anticipation de Blutch à paraître ce mois-ci, dans laquelle les personnages « vivent et meurent dans un monde où l'on ne sait pourquoi on travaille, ni même ce qu'il advient du produit de ce travail. » / Entreprise, Femmes, Libéralisme, (...) / Entreprise, Femmes, Libéralisme, Livre, Société, Travail, Bande dessinée - 2014/01

D'un côté, les partisans d'une frugalité volontaire, renvoyés à la « lampe à huile » par le président français Emmanuel Macron. De l'autre, des dirigeants d'entreprises polluantes débitant des gadgets destinés à alimenter l'aliénation par la consommation. Les caricatures qui structurent les débats sur la (...) / Monde, Capitalisme, Écologie, Économie, Libéralisme, Commerce, Décroissance, Environnement, Idéologie, Climat, Politique - 2021/02

« Après le congrès »… Toute demande d'entrevue avec des dirigeants chinois se solde par cette réponse — ce qui n'exclut pas des rencontres informelles. Que se passe-t-il derrière les murs rouges du siège du Parti communiste, à deux pas de la Cité interdite ? / Chine, Communisme, Démocratie, Idées, Parti (...) / Chine, Communisme, Démocratie, Idées, Parti politique, Société, Travail - 2012/09

Even with Trump’s defeat, the rest of the world cannot ignore the country’s deep and disfiguring scars. They will not soon heal.

Counterterrorism without counterinsurgency is impossible.

This article is the English version of : Marie-Françoise Bechtel, « Peut-il y avoir une démocratie européenne ? », published in Politique étrangère, Vol. 83, Issue 4, 2018.

Asking whether a European democracy is in fact possible is clearly a sign of the times. Does this question, which points to a deficit by inviting us to revisit a much-criticized model, also point to a necessary objective? We might initially think not: things move fast in the early twenty-first century and, as Hubert Védrine highlights, the world does not wait for powers to constitute themselves as such if they have neither the desire nor the ability to do so.

In the multilateral world that is currently taking shape, is the key challenge for Europe not rather to present itself as a power that can defend its economic and strategic interests like the other great centers of power, providing itself with the means to speak in an independent voice to the best of its ability? In terms of this challenge—which plants the seeds of tomorrow in the present, and highlights that action cannot be taken too soon—it could be argued that the EU’s internal modes of existence and organization are ultimately of secondary importance. We might even go so far as to apply the reasoning of Thierry de Montbrial, who believes that in the current international order, what counts is the effectiveness of a regime, which results from its power and thus wins the support of its people.  It is, however, undeniable that the EU lacks effectiveness in its self-projection as a power, and above all lacks the support of the peoples within it. This is hardly surprising.

The democratic deficit

It is difficult for any honest observer, let alone a jurist, to deny that the EU has a democratic deficit. Indeed, the word “deficit” is actually something of an understatement here.

What is inevitable?

It is often pointed out how the EU’s expansion made effective governance based on representation worthy of this name impossible, but this overlooks the fact that the European Economic Community (EEC) turned its back on the essential principles of democracy at a very early stage. It was with the Van Gend en Loos ruling in 1963 that the Court of Justice of the European Communities (CJEC) established law decided by the Community authorities as a “sovereign legal order imposed on member states.” This power grab beyond the letter and spirit of the Treaty of Rome initially went unnoticed, as it seemed to represent a diversion from the hierarchy of norms, a kind of challenge destined to remain the only of its kind. However, and contrary to all expectations, this approach ultimately succeeded in the context of inattentiveness and carelessness on the part of the member states: nature abhors a vacuum, and the ambition of judges did the rest.

It was also with the support of judges that EU directives—which, according to the text of the treaty (still in force), “shall be binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each Member State”—became texts that set out in detail how this “result” should be reached. As a result, the transposition of directives has now become a matter of simply copying and pasting into domestic law extremely dense texts that are usually dictated by non-representative bodies  —a point to which we will return—with ever-increasing reach. While citizens’ obligation to know the law remains theoretical when it comes to national law (which itself has the tendency to become tediously prolix), this deficit is amplified to the nth degree in European law, with these same citizens being aware of its vast extent and nothing else. For thirty years the EU’s powers were continually expanded, and their juxtaposition with out of reach institutions did the rest.

The institutions

The institutions of the modern EU do not fundamentally differ, in their actual definition, from those present at its beginnings. The fact that they exercise an increasing number of sometimes poorly defined powers does however give the devolved powers of the bodies that make up the EU much greater reach.

Technically speaking the EU is an international organization, but one that is sui generis, in which the member states “have freely chosen to exercise some of their powers in common,” as article 88-1 of the French Constitution has stated since Maastricht (1992). This makes it a unique organization. The question is whether the acceptance of supranationality may exempt the institutions of this unique body from respecting democratic standards founded on the separation of powers. These powers are almost entirely absent: first and foremost, there is no legislative power derived from a sovereign people that has exclusive power to define norms, a power that is shared with the Commission. The Commission is itself not only the executive body of the Council of the European Union, but a parallel source of uncontrolled legislative initiative. Meanwhile, judicial authority is beyond the reach of citizens, who can consult the Court only in cases where there is a direct interest, few of which it recognizes. […]

Read the rest of the article here.

>>> More articles of Politique étrangère are available for reading
on Cairn International <<<

Avec le triomphe des républicains aux législatives de 2010, les militants antiavortement ont repris du poil de la bête. Leur tactique consiste à faire passer des lois restreignant le droit à l'IVG au niveau de chaque Etat, le rendant parfois quasi impossible à exercer. Dernier rempart : la Cour (...) / États-Unis, États-Unis (affaires intérieures), Droit, Femmes, Parti politique, Santé, Médecine, Droits des femmes - 2013/12

Dans des circonstances très controversées, M. Alberto Fujimori, au pouvoir depuis dix ans, a été réélu président du Pérou lors des scrutins des 9 avril et 28 mai 2000. Désavoué par l'Organisation des Etats américains (OEA), qui a retiré ses observateurs, admonesté par les Etats-Unis, il l'a emporté au (...) / Amérique latine, Pérou - 2000/07

Dans le hors-série Édition 2021 du Monde, le journaliste Philippe Ricard consacre un article à la situation sanitaire mondiale intitulé « Le coronavirus amplifie les dérèglements du monde ». Il y cite notamment Josep Borrell, auteur de l’article « COVID-19 : le monde d’après est déjà là », publié dans le numéro 2/2020 de Politique étrangère.

[…] Au passage, les États occidentaux prennent conscience de leur grande dépendance envers leurs fournisseurs asiatiques. Pas un gramme de paracétamol n’est plus produit en Europe. Au Japon, comme aux États-Unis et en Europe, il est de nouveau question de relocaliser près des consommateurs certaines activités stratégiques, en particulier la fabrication de médicaments. « Notre intérêt politique est de ne pas trop dépendre des puissances qui peuvent, d’une façon ou d’une autre, nous faire payer un jour le prix de notre dépendance », juge Josep Borrell, le haut représentant de l’UE pour les Affaires étrangères, dans la revue Politique étrangère (IFRI, été 2020). Pour lui, ajuster la mondialisation pour mieux se protéger ne revient pas à céder au protectionnisme. Un des multiples défis du monde post-Covid, à condition que la planète parvienne à tourner la page aussitôt que possible. […]

Retrouvez l’article de Josep Borrell ici.

Retrouvez le numéro 2/2020 de Politique étrangère ici.

Collecter et conserver pour chaque citoyen la liste des correspondants, la date et la fréquence des échanges, les sites ou forums fréquentés, les propos tenus et publiés sur les réseaux sociaux, la localisation de leurs appareils mobiles porte tout à la fois atteinte à la liberté de réunion et (...) / États-Unis, Europe, Commerce international, Droit international, Information, Informatique, Sécurité, Internet, Multinationales, Technologies de l'information, Technologie, Télécommunications, Terrorisme - 2015/01

Dans le cadre de notre enquête sur le Maghreb, nous publions ci-dessous l'opinion de M. Kateb Yacine, jeune poète, romancier et dramaturge algérien, considéré comme le plus doué des écrivains de son pays. / Algérie, Histoire, Littérature, Maghreb - (...) / Algérie, Histoire, Littérature, Maghreb - 1961/05

Cette recension a été publiée dans le numéro d’hiver 2020-2021 de Politique étrangère (n° 4/2020). Sophie Boisseau du Rocher, chercheuse associée au Centre Asie de l’Ifri, propose une analyse de l’ouvrage de Thant Myint-U, The Hidden History of Burma: Race, Capitalism, and the Crisis of Democracy in the 21st Century  (W.W.Norton, 2019, 272 pages).

Voilà un livre que tous les intervenants sur la Birmanie/Myanmar devraient lire avant de poser des jugements, souvent définitifs, sur un pays d’une complexité extrême. Thant Myint-U nous invite à mieux saisir cette complexité en replaçant les événements contemporains dans une perspective historique large, avec les clés de lecture indispensables. Historien pétri des réalités birmanes (son grand-père était un homme politique de premier plan avant de devenir secrétaire général des Nations unies), éduqué à Cambridge, Thant Myint-U est à même d’expliquer à des Occidentaux candides les détours du pays qui, accumulés, rendent la situation contemporaine excessivement sensible.

Le Myanmar (l’auteur explique pourquoi le pays change de nom en 1989) compte 55 millions d’habitants, situé entre la Chine et l’Inde, et bordant le Bangladesh et la Thaïlande. Sa population, à 85 % bouddhiste, est composée de plus de 135 ethnies, au faible niveau d’éducation. C’est l’un des pays les plus pauvres d’Asie, parmi les moins industrialisés, au cœur des trafics mondiaux de narcotiques.

Que s’est-il passé pour que ce pays disposant d’une localisation géostratégique de premier plan, de ressources naturelles abondantes et de talents accumule tant d’impasses et finisse en dictature militaire de 1962 à 2010, isolé du reste du monde ? L’auteur explique le poids de l’histoire, la longue marche vers l’unité nationale, une colonisation britannique violente et qui divise, l’intermède japonais puis les spasmes des années post-indépendance. Dans un contexte trouble, Ne Win prend le pouvoir et mène le pays au bord du gouffre avec la « voie birmane vers le socialisme ». Puis l’armée le remplace en 1988, poursuit de sa vindicte Aung San Suu Kyi et met en place un système prédateur dont elle a directement bénéficié. En réaction, les pays occidentaux appliquent de lourdes sanctions qui n’ont fait qu’accélérer les rapprochements avec une Chine gourmande.

L’ouverture et la transition vers la démocratie ont été applaudies par le monde entier et c’est surtout ces années que Thant analyse. L’auteur montre comment le cyclone Nargis a été un déclencheur et a accéléré la transition, en mettant en valeur l’incapacité et les déficiences de l’armée.

Une question court tout au long du livre : pourquoi ce pays n’a-t‑il pas réussi à se constituer en nation ? L’armée, omniprésente et omnipuissante, n’a pas apporté de solutions durables aux multiples fractures de la société. La démocratie n’y a pas mieux réussi : elle a même exacerbé des conflits latents. C’est à la question ethnique qu’Aung San Suu Kyi, en digne fille de son père, s’est d’abord attelée, avant d’être rattrapée par la question religieuse.

Thant Myint-U parle tout au long de son ouvrage de la question rohingya, et de la place très particulière occupée par les minorités musulmanes en Birmanie/Myanmar. Il raconte comment les terribles événements de 2017-2018 trouvent leur origine dans le Raj britannique et se sont compliqués au fil des ans. Finalement, à travers le drame des Rohingyas, l’auteur montre combien son pays était voué à l’échec pour une raison « cachée » – référence au titre de l’ouvrage : parce qu’il est un État sans être encore une nation. L’auteur appelle donc à « un nouveau projet de l’imagination » qui, au-delà des réformes politiques, permettrait une réconciliation profonde et salvatrice.

Sophie Boisseau du Rocher

>> S’abonner à Politique étrangère <<

Très populaire aux Etats-Unis et vénérée par Ronald Reagan, la philosophe et romancière Ayn Rand met en scène dans ses œuvres de fiction des héros solitaires en butte au conformisme borné de leurs semblables ; une célébration du génie prométhéen qui déboucha sur celle du moins d'Etat et des paradis (...) / États-Unis, État, Idées, Idéologie, Libéralisme, Littérature, Personnalités, Société, Travail - 2008/08

With January 20th at hand, I have been thinking more and more about what I assume will be a great shift back toward normalcy in American foreign policy. Despite the failures of the last four years, I have confidence that the Biden administration, along with incoming Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, will reclaim America’s soft power influence and return to multilateralism. The Trump administration sought to undermine the Obama administration’s legacy by removing the U.S. from several important foreign policy initiatives purely on the basis of partisanship and isolationism. So reestablishing America’s international presence and signal the resurgence of U.S. leadership could be accomplished early on with these three foreign policy initiatives.

1. Rejoining the JCPOA Iran Nuclear Deal

Despite Trumps withdrawal from the JCPOA in early May of 2018, the seven other original parties still remain in the agreement. The decision to withdraw from the agreement was purely political and undermined faith in U.S. negotiations. Considering the recent easing of tensions in the Middle East in regards to Israel, I can’t help but think that Iran, Israel’s chief regional adversary, would’ve been better poised to get aboard the peace train had we not abandoned the agreement. The UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan all have agreed to normalize relations with Israel. Normalized relations between Israel and Iran is only impossible if people in power believe it to be. 

By withdrawing from the JCPOA, Trump signaled that the U.S. prefers a state of heightened hostilities. Knowing the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had consistently confirmed Iran’s compliance with the agreement, I can not think of anything the U.S. could desire of Iran other than economic collapse. Despite how you may feel about Iran, I myself am Jewish, a collapsed Iran does not benefit the U.S. You would think by now we would have learned our lesson on toppling governments. Every time we removed a leader and toppled a government, we created a vacuum where extremists rise to power. If our goal is to end islamist terrorism, we should be focused on deescalation and a normalization of relations. Iran used to be our closest ally in the region and its people are not as illiberal as conservatives would have you believe. There is an opportunity to finally establish a grand strategy in the region focused on economic growth and liberal values. The Iran Deal provided the start of that strategy, but also left roam for punishing the funding of terrorism.

The JCPOA had stipulations that the U.S. and others could keep in place any non-nuclear related sanctions and also impose new ones if appropriate. Additionally, the agreement was also a show of good faith in multilateral negotiations between western powers and China and Russia. The pettiness of the U.S. withdrawal undercut the country’s ability to address the issues cited for its decisions to leave in the first place. Normalizing relations with Iran and integrating into their economy is the best option for reducing Iran funded terrorism. 

President-elect Biden has already said he would rejoin the JCPOA. Despite how U.S. politicians try to leverage this domestically, this is a foreign policy win. It signals to the world that America is ready to engage in multilateralism again, and that we are willing to make peace with adversaries. 

2. Renegotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership

Biden has expressed interest in reentering negotiation on the TPP free trade deal. The TPP was revised and rewritten into the CPTPP or Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. Most economists agree that free trade is a net positive for all parties, however they do acknowledge that the gains are usually distributed unequally. While I am aware that the President-elect wants to renegotiate for more labor and agricultural protections we should be aware that China has already created its version of TPP named the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), with 15 Asia-Pacific countries expected to sign this year. The TPP would have comprised 40% of the worlds GDP, and it is not too late as the member countries have expressed favorable attitudes towards the U.S. returning to the negotiating table. 

The real reason the U.S. abandoned the TPP, like the JCPOA, was domestic politics. Contrary to claims that the TPP would benefit China, it would actually have reduced China’s economic control in the region. If the U.S. used the economic gains to invest in workers who’s industries would be adversely affected, it would be able to counteract the inequality that often occurs with free trade while both increasing it’s own GDP and developing close economic ties in the Indo-Pacific. Conservatives drastically reduce tax rates  and remove regulations for large corporations that in turn strangle small and medium sized businesses, reducing competition. To then turn and politicize free trade as harmful to the labor and agricultural class is shameless. 

The TPP, while not perfect, would have significantly increased U.S. GDP, created favorable economic ties in the Indo-Pacific region, and would have put pressure on China. The Biden administration should push for the labor and agricultural protections, but it must also include legislation that redistributes the gains of free trade to those who are adversely affected. The Democrats now control both chambers of congress and the executive branch. Getting the trade agreement passed should not be difficult for them if they are unified. Creating a winning narrative and properly framing the deal should be a key focus. However, if Democrats are unable to beat back Republican misinformation and fear mongering, the inclusion of economic support for adversely affected industries will be of great importance. The Democrats will be able to point to the GDP gains and those who held jobs that were negatively impacted would come out better for it as well. 

3. Paris Climate Agreement

Lastly we come to the issue of our time: Climate Change. It is an indisputable fact of science that humans are negatively impacting the global environment. Instead of grasping the mantle of leadership, the U.S. has abdicated its moral responsibility and reveled in pseudo-science and corporate propaganda. There was a time when progress and capitalism went hand in hand. Now conservatives, and even some liberals, cling to the past, subsidizing dying industries and deregulating environment destroying externalities. This global crisis can never be properly addressed if those in power still seek to obfuscate the truth and mislead the public.

The Paris Climate Agreement was adopted by 196 Parties. The U.S. was not one of them. It is a landmark international treaty on climate change and it is well passed time the U.S. signs on to it. Now more than ever, we need strong leadership. There can be no progress if Democrats give any political leeway to climate change deniers and corporate lobbyists dressed as politicians. The act of signing the Paris Agreement would do more than commit the U.S. to enacting sound policies to curb greenhouse emissions, it would signal that U.S. leadership is back. 

The Agreement also developed a framework for how developed countries can provide financial, technical, and capacity building support to those that need it. This would be a smart way for the U.S. to reemerge as both a leader and a global force for good. Increasing both our standing in the world and positive ties with developing nations. The only requirement is the political will to do what is right.

Conclusion

There was a time when the U.S. wanted a strong global presence and the world in turn wanted the U.S. to be present. We must return to that again, but this time focus on economic cooperation and diplomacy. In doing so we can create a more progressive and moral global society.

Pour la France, l'anniversaire de l'indépendance de l'Algérie aura été moins l'occasion de revenir sur sa politique coloniale que de redéfinir pour elle-même la conscience qu'elle a d'une « guerre sans nom ». / Algérie, France, Colonialisme, Histoire, Guerre d'Algérie 1954-1962 - (...) / Algérie, France, Colonialisme, Histoire, Guerre d'Algérie 1954-1962 - 1992/11

Accédez à l’article de Robert Tombs ici.

Retrouvez le sommaire du numéro 4/2020 de Politique étrangère ici.