Voters in France go to the polls today in the first round of presidential elections. If the opinion polls are right, none of the 11 candidates is likely to garner as much as a quarter of the votes, but what is crucial under the French voting system is which two come first and second — even if there are only a few votes between second and third — as there will be a run-off between the two front runners in a second round of voting in two weeks’ time. Pundits on both sides of the Channel are agreed that what one might call “traditional” party’s candidates are unlikely to make the grade. More probable is that the centrist former investment banker and civil servant, Emmanuel Macron, who has never held elected office, will go head-to-head with Marine Le Pen of the far-right Front National dynasty. One has to note that the leftist Socialist Jean-Luc Mélenchon has been surging in the polls recently and it’s not impossible that the conservative Francois Fillon, recently accused of nepotism, might rally. So all is still to play for as voters make up their minds. Indeed, in the turbulent Western politics post-Brexit and Trump it maybe rash to even try to predict the outcome. What may be crucial is the turn-out; voting in France is not compulsory and some disillusioned voters may decide to stay at home. Even if Le Pen’s supporters may be more highly motivated (especially after the recent shooting of a policeman by a Frenchman of North African origin), which could mean she might just sneak into first place, most commentators believe she would be trashed in the second round. That is what happened to her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, when Jacques Chirac wiped the floor with him in the second round in 2002 (though I suspect Marine could poll better than her father’s final tally of just under 18%). The question therefore is: who is best placed to beat Marine, even if in principle any of the leading contenders should be able to? I believe the answer to that is Emmanuel Macron, not just because he is new, looks good and is clearly intelligent, but for two other reasons related to policy. The first is that he is a keen European (unlike Marine, who argues for a “Frexit”, and is unsurprisingly chummy with Russia’s Vladimir Putin). The other reason is that Macron understands that if France is to compete effectively it has to reform its attitude to work, deregulation and so on. The economy needs a shake-up, which would benefit not only France but help strengthen the eurozone. That’s important for Britain’s trading future, too, whatever form of Brexit emerges from the May government’s current quagmire.
Posts Tagged ‘Vladimir Putin’
Posted by jonathanfryer on Sunday, 23rd April, 2017
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Emmanuel Macron, EU, France, Francois Fillon, Front National, Jacques Chirac, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, Jean-Marie Le Pen, Marine Le Pen, Vladimir Putin | Leave a Comment »
Posted by jonathanfryer on Sunday, 5th February, 2017
Europe currently faces three serious threats: Islamic terrorism, Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. At least that was the view of Belgian MEP (and the European Parliament’s Brexit negotiator), Guy Verhofstadt, when he gave the Isaiah Berlin lecture for Liberal International at Chatham House in London earlier this week. He warned that the European Union now has fewer friends in the United States than ever, with Mr Trump himself openly trying to break it up, just as Mr Putin is trying to undermine it. But Guy acknowledged that Europe itself is in a crisis — a “polycrisis”, as he called it — “a crisis of migration, of internal security, of geopolitical weakness in our neighbourhood.” This is unsustainable in the modern world, he argued, urging that the EU must reform. However, his words were not all doom and gloom, as he declared that Brexit “is a golden opportunity … to get our act together inside the European Union. What is really needed is not new ideas; the ideas already exist… we have the building blocks… we need the capacities… to do what is necessary.”
Guy is a former Prime Minister of Belgium who leads the ALDE group within the European Parliament. His latest book is entitled Europe’s Last Chance, which I shall review when a copy is available. For many of us in Britain, of course, the great tragedy is that the UK has willfully stepped aside from confronting the challenges facing the EU, at a time when we should be leading, not leaving. Prime Minister Theresa May blithely says that Britain will be great on the global stage, but even if she can hold the country together (which is far from certain), Britain on its own is far weaker than being part of the EU — and Donald Trump for one is well aware of that.
Posted by jonathanfryer on Thursday, 15th December, 2016
Earlier this week I was one of the speakers at a Global Diplomatic Forum event in London on the foreign policy consequences of Donald Trump becoming US President. The other members of the panel were the new Latvian Amnassador to the Court of St James’s and the Conservative MP, Daniek Kawczynzki. By chance, the Ambassador and I were seated on a sofa on one side of the Chair, Andrew Wilson, while Dan Kawczynski was alone on another the other side, and that was exactly how our alignment went when it came to the discussion. Mr Kawczynski set the tone by focusing his opening remarks on why a Trump presidency is welcome and how we should engage more with Russia. It is disconcerting how pro Putin so many right wing Conservative as well as UKIP politicians are. The Ambassador countered with a resume of how Latvia suffered under Soviet Occupation and I spoke of what I had seen of Russian encroachment in Georgia this summer, as well as the assassination of journalists and liberal politicians in Moscow. But I also spoke of my wider concerns of what promises to be greater US isolationism under Trump, regarding international trade, climate change and so on. The appointment of Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State does not bode well, either. I would have liked to discuss things further with Daniel Kawczynski in the coffee break, but he shot out of the event like a bat out of hell.
Posted by jonathanfryer on Sunday, 13th November, 2016
Today, Remembrance Sunday, the BBC screened an interview with France’s far right leader, Marine Le Pen. Doubtless Andrew Marr and his producer are feeling proud of themselves with this journalistic “coup” that has caused such a storm on twitter, but they should be ashamed of themselves. Not only did this choice of interviewee dishonour the memory of people who died in the last century as victims of fascism and Hitler’s, Mussolini’s and Franco’s wars but it also gave a powerful platform to extremism. This came on top of the blanket coverage given to Nigel Farage and UKIP (which Le Pen’s Front National recognises as a sister party) over the past few years, especially in the run-up to the EU Referendum. BBC boffins would doubtless justify Farage’s being their most frequent Question Time guest on the grounds that he is entertaining, but there is nothing entertaining about the core values of Farage or Le Pen or Donald Trump, who also got massive coverage on the BBC. Lord Reith must be spinning in his grave. Farage and Le Pen are both part of the Trump-Putin axis that is speedily developing — an alliance that holds liberal European values in contempt. In case anyone doubts this in the British context, just watch when Farage leads what he hopes will be 100,000 UKIP, BNP and EDL Brexiteers to intimidate the Supreme Court when it convenes to review the recent High Court ruling on Article 50. Britain is heading into dangerous waters and instead of sounding the warning bells the BBC is becoming the extremists’ megaphone..
Posted by jonathanfryer on Wednesday, 9th November, 2016
2016 is proving to be the year of false assumptions. First there was the belief (shared by the then Prime Minister, David Cameron) that Britons would vote to stay in the European Union. Then there was the widespread conviction that Americans could not be crazy enough to elect Donald Trump as President. Both assumptions proved horribly wrong. So what comes next? The Front National’s Marine Le Pen as President of France? If I were a more traditional Christian I’d be tempted to think that Satan was at work, sweeping aside the liberal consensus that has prevailed in much of the West since the Second World War and opening the way for nationalism, hatred and conflict. But it is human beings who are responsible for what has been happening and human beings who will have to confront the consequences. In January 2017 we will see Trump in the White House, Putin in the Kremlin and an ever stronger Xi Jinping in Beijing’s Firbudden City. This is not a prospect Europeans should relish. But before we all admit defeat and emigrate to Canada, let us make a stand for European liberal values and the rule of law. We need a stronger, more united European Union to be a force for peace and reason in this turbulent new global reality, and Britain should be in there helping that to be the case. This is absolutely not the moment for the UK to pack up and leave the EU, to face the harsh realities of the new world order in isolation.
Posted by jonathanfryer on Monday, 26th September, 2016
A few days before June’s EU Referendum invited to Riga to give a lecture on Brexit at the University of Latvia. The mood among the audience (and other speakers) was one of total mystification: why would Britain want to leave the EU after more than 40 years, when other countries are knocking on the door to get in? Three months later, the attitude of the Baltic States to the Brexit vote is one of sorrow and dismay, partly because they believe Britain’s departure (if it happens) will weaken the EU but also because they feel it will affect them. The possible return home of Latvian, Lithuanian and Estonia migrants currently working in the UK is one outcome, but as the Lithuanian Ambassador to the Court of St James’s, Asta Skaisgiryte, said at a Political and Economic Circle Forum at the National Liberal Club this evening, a major concern is about security, in particular the way that the EU will or will not continue to stand up to Russia. All the Baltic states are nervous about Vladimir Putin, following the Russian encroachment into Georgia and Ukraine, not to mention the dreadful decades of Soviet occupation, human rights abuses and deportations. But the Ambassador also highlighted a specific potential threat from the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad, arguing where would its growing naval and military might be focused if not westwards to Europe? Baroness Judith Jolly, a LibDem spokesperson on defence in the House of Lords. also concentrated on security matters in her comments from this evening’s panel. Although Britain will remain a member of NATO, pulling out of EU cooperation could weaken the North Atlantic Alliance. Moreover, Brexit could be a prelude to other political events that would have been unthinkable only months ago, such as a possible Donald Trump victory in the US presidential election in November or the triumph of the Front National’s Marine Le Pen in next year’s French elections. It was interesting that an unusually large turnout had registered for the seminar, which also heard from Tom Brake MP, LibDem Foreign Affairs spokesman in the Commons, Vytis Jurkonis from the Freedom Association office in Vilnius, and the Chairman, Lord Chidgey.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Asta Skaisgiryte, Brexit, David Chidgey, Donald Trump, Estonia, EU Referendum, Judith Jolly, Kaliningrad, Latvia, Lithuania, Marine Le Pen, NATO, Russia, Tom Brake, Vladimir Putin, Vytis Jurkonis | Leave a Comment »
Posted by jonathanfryer on Sunday, 31st May, 2015
The fact that Sepp Blatter’s re-election as President of FIFA failed to get a winning two-thirds plurality on the first round goes to show that a growing number of countries’ football bodies are unhappy at the way the pugnacious Swiss has presided over years of corruption and shady dealings. Though he is not one of the senior FIFA officials currently under investigation by the US Attorney General and the FBI, he should have accepted that the buck stopped with him, meriting his resignation. Instead, his challenger, Prince Ali bin Hussein of Jordan, withdrew instead of pushing the vote to a second round. The margin was too great to overcome, as so many countries around the world that have benefitted from FIFA’s largesse (including, allegedly, bribes and kickbacks to their soccer officials) were bound to give Blatter their support, as did France, shamefully. Russian President Vladimir Putin sent a warm congratulatory message to Blatter on his getting a fifth five-year term. Two of a kind, I can’t help thinking. I was pleased to see the UK Minister for Culture, Media and Sport, John Whittingdale, come out very strongly against Blatter’s FIFA reign in the Sunday Times today, and that newspaper’s long investigation into FIFA’s dodgy side deserves applause. Blatter himself observed snidely that Britain has sour grapes because it did not win either of the two forthcoming World Cup slots, but this only goes to show how out of tune he is with universal morality. Qatar did get one of those fixtures, in a still controversial decision.
Posted by jonathanfryer on Saturday, 28th February, 2015
The murder in Moscow yesterday of opposition politician Boris Nemtsov was a cruel reminder of just how far the values of Vladimir Putin’s Russia differ from the European mainstream. Many other critics of the Kremlin — not least journalists — have been killed, beaten up or imprisoned since Vlad the Bad came to power. I suppose it was natural for the West to imagine when Communism collapsed a quarter of a century ago that Russia would modernise politically as well as economically, in short to become more like us, but this assumption failed to take into account the fact that Russia is unlike Europe in many ways — including the high regard many Russians have for strong leaders and their rejection of contemporary European liberal views on everything from the right to peaceful protest to same sex marriage. Moreover, even if Putin is out-of-step with European and North American values, he has many admirers in Africa, Asia and Latin America. So as a new Cold War seems to be shaping up in the wake of the Russian intervention in Ukraine Moscow is unlikely to find itself alone out in the cold. In the meantime, it is natural for us to feel compassion for the small band of brave liberal voices inside Russia itself who dare to speak out. They deserve our support, as well as sanctuary in Europe if they feel their only means of survival is to get out.
Posted by jonathanfryer on Tuesday, 24th June, 2014
This week, for the first time ever, the LGBTi Pride Rainbow Flag is flying from the facade of Europe House in London’s Smith Square, headquarters of the European Parliament office and European Commission representation. Yesterday afternoon, there was a seminar there on extending LGBT rights in the EU, learning from the UK experience. For once it was good to celebrate an area in which Britain is actually a leader in the European Union. Things are not nearly so advanced in some formerly Communist states of Europe, but the point was interestingly made at the seminar that labour mobility within the EU had helped to alter attitudes in some central and eastern European states radically. Poland is a good case in point; until recently overwhelmingly conserative an often homophobic it has recently liberalised, partly thanks to migrant workers who came to Britain, for example, and for the first time engaged with LGBTi people and later returned home with a different opinion. Alas, in some eastern European states that are not part of the EU the situation is still dire. It was good (but a little depressing) to hear of work being done to help activists in Belarus who have been prevented from setting up a solidarity group. In Russia, the situation is actually regresing, as Putin has led a red-blooded heterosexual counter-offensive as what he decries as gay EU expansionism. Anyway, when Conchita Wurst will lead the London Pride celebrations in Trafalgar Square this Saturday, so those of us living in London will have much to be joyful about, which should fortify us to help defend the rights of those living in jurisdictions that are not so inclusive.
Posted by jonathanfryer on Saturday, 12th April, 2014
In this centenary year of the outbreak of the First World War many minds have been turning to the issues of war and peace, and when I make speeches at hustings or rallies in the current European election campaign I always make the point that the founding fathers of what is now the European Union wanted to enmesh the economies of France and Germany (in particular) so that war in western Europe would be unthinkable. And so it appears. But it is all too easy for us today to take that for granted. As a child of the 1950s, I was very much aware of the legacy of the Second World War — the bomb sites, the drab unpainted unrestored buildings, the dreary food and the tail-end of rationing — but I was too young to see National Service. So it was perhaps a little perverse of me to go off to war voluntarily at the age of 18 — as a journalist in Vietnam. What I saw there burned into my heart a hatred for war and for all the human emotions connected with it. I attended my first Quaker meeting there, and joined the Society of Friends when I went up to Oxford. And although Reuters sent me off to comfortable Brussels when I joined the news agency after university, the lure of conflict zones was too great, and relaunched as a freelance commentator and broadcaster I covered a whole range of bloody situations, from Israel/Palestine to Central America and Angola. That was not because I revelled in the suffering. Quite the contrary. But I believed passionately that it needed to be reported, so people might learn that humanity should develop ways of resolving differences and rivalries more constructively. I still feel that today, as Vladimir Putin seems intent on infiltrating deeper into eastern Ukraine, alarming not just Kiev but several other of Russia’s neighbours. In the recent Clegg versus Farage EU IN/OUT debates in Britain, Nick Clegg stressed the importance of Britain’s EU membership for jobs — and of course that is true. But I shall also carry on talking about something that is not just related to the economy or livelihoods: the EU — enlarged a decade ago to take in formerly Communist states of central and eastern Europe — is a brilliant example of how to do things differently, about how to live togeter in peace, celebrating diversity. Fall back on nationalism, as Nigel Farage and some of his more unsavoury counterparts on the Continent would like us to do, will only lead to renewed tensions between peoples and, yes, the reappearance of the spectre of war.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Angola, Brussels, Central America, First World War, Israel/Palestine, Nick Clegg, Nigel Farage, Quakers, Religious Society of Friends, Reuters, Russia, Second World War, the European Union, Ukraine, Vietnam War, Vladimir Putin | 1 Comment »