Open New Chapter Across Atlantic

Open New Chapter in Our Alliance, Rice in Paris Urges Europe- U.S. Department Of State

Concluding her trip around Europe and the Middle East, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice chose to deliver her key policy speech in Paris.

The will to mend fences couldn’t be more explicit.

”History will judge us not by our old disagreements, but byu our new achievements.”

”If we make the pursuit of global freedom the organizing principle of the 21st century, we will achieve historic global advances for justice and prosperity, for liberty and peace.”

”All that we seek to achieve in the world requires that America and Europe remain close partners.”

”America has everything to gain from having a stronger Europe as a partner in building a safer and better world.”

The speech as a whole, and the Q & A session that followed, is well worth reading.

Denmark Moves On!

The election to the Folketing of Denmark resulted in a resounding re-conformation of the centre-right coalition under Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen.

For the opposition Social Democrats, it was the second very serious setback. After the 2001 election catastrophe, it changed its leader. Now, it will change leader again. But the core problem is the deep divisions on policy issues inside the party.

The Venstre party of the Prime Minister had a small setback, although confirming its position as the largest party of the country. The junior coalition partner Conservatives, however, registred their first increase in the Folketing for 2 years, and were accordingly jubilant.

After the 2001 election victory, the government faced a most challenging EU presidency, which it handled very well.

These times there are also significant challenges on the horizon. A major structural reform of local administration has to be taken through the Folketing. A referendum has to be held on the Constitutional Treaty of the European Union, although a very broad agreement between the parties on a Yes recommendation has been secured.

Anders Fogh Rasmussen made the issue of strengthening Denmark in face of the new competition coming from the East of Europe and Asia one of his key points in the campaign. At some point in time, this will require not just an increase in R & D spending, but also more structural reforms in the welfare state system. An expert panel will report on the issue later this year.

That’s when he might run into problems with his present parliamentary base. The two-party coalition is supported in the Folketing by the anti-immigration but pro-welfare state and heavily populist Danish People’s Party. Serious reforms is unlikely to be possible on that basis, but might require an open hand to the more leftist liberal Radikale Venstre that emerged as one of the true winners of the election.

But that’s some year into the future. For the next year or two, there is likely to be smooth sailing for the most reform-oriented government in Northern Europe at the moment.

Congratulations!

Ariel Sharon and Abu Mazen – Round Two

Haaretz – Israel News – Article

It is two years since Ariel Sharon and Abu Mazen met in Aqaba soon after the war in Iraq. There was hope that a momentum for peace could be created.

It failed. The Americans were distracted, Sharon was disinterested and Arafat was distruptive.

This time it just might be different, as I have written previously. And this analysis by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz gives some of the reasons why.

Israel, the Wall and the West Bank

WallProj_eng250204.pdf (application/pdf Object)

A comment on my commentary on how Ariel Sharon of Israel and Abu Mazen of Palestine faces a very similar task of confronting religious fundamentalism in their respective societies takes issue with me on a couple of points.

One of them concerns whether there really have been or are any expansionist Israeli plans for the West Bank. Apart from the fact that my comment was on those wanting to expand into Judea and Samaria to create an Israel within biblical boundaries – and they certainly exist – I think it is worth noting what Israel is doing in terms of the huge separation wall it is now building.

This map shows what it is all about. Only along 10 % is the wall separating Israel from Palestine – for 90 % it will be separating Palestinian from Palestinian. Hundreds of thousands of people will be locked into enclaves or separated from what they consider their omeland.

Some might not like the word expansion for it. Others might find it difficult to find a word more appropriate.

Kirkuk Conflict Coming

Aljazeera.Net – Kurds accused of rigging Kirkuk vote

Sometimes elections solve problems, but sometimes they don’t. In the Kirkuk region of northern Iraq, there is every reason to expect that we will see a rapid build-up of tensions as the results of the recent vote are announced.

In areas like these, it’s not the voting that is the important issue, but the decision on the voters list, since this decides the ethnic balance of the election outcome.

The future of the Kirkuk region is one of the most difficult and potentially dangereous issues in the entire region. You can safely expect the conflict to escalate rapidly when the election results are announced. I can only hope that US plans to now take home the extra troops deployed to Iraq for the election are not implemented in this area.

New Chance in Palestine?

There is an air of hope over the Middle East after a year of increasing desperation.

Key is what will happen between Prime Minister Ariel Sharon of Israel and President Abu Mazen of the Palestine Authority. History has moved both of them to position where their respective political agendas are remarkably similar. Therein lies the historic opportunity.

Both now have to confront the forces of religious fundamentalism inside their respective socities. Both now that it is success or failure in this that will lead them to success or failure overall.

Sharon has promised to evacuate app 7 000 settlers in primarily the Gaza strip. He knows that their positions are untenable over time. But when pursuing this policy he is confronted by, and forced to confront, all those believing in the creation of an Israel within biblical boundaries through a policy of aggressive settlements on occupied Palestine lands.

This is a U-turn of large dimension. Ariel Sharon has been seen as the promoter and protector of this movement for decades. Now he is seen as betraying them, and it’s no joke when the Israeli security services fear for his life. In turning Israel around, he’s confronting important sectors in Israel society.

But he has no choice. The policy of expansion will only lead Israel to greater and greater problems. It didn’t work in Lebanon.

Abu Mazens task is essentially the same. He must confront and marginalize the forces of the armed intifada and muslim fundamentalism in order to be able to continue building a reasonable democratic Palestine state that can live in peace with Israel.

So far, both of them are moving forward with determination on their respective agendas. The agendas are separate, but they are mutually supportive. Success for the one makes it easier to achieve success for the other.

It’s much too early to see how far this can carry. Can the so called road map towards a settlement be revived?

We’ll know more after the summer. Then there will have been parliamentary elections in Palestine, and we will probably have seen the beginning of the withdrawal of Jewish settlements from Gaza. Then, it might be appropriate to look at the possibilities ahead.

Higher and Higher Taxes…

It might sound bizarre, but the Swedish government is planning to raise the total tax burden on the economy even further.

Not only are we already the world leaders in taxes – we are have also increased our lead over neighbours and competitors.

Since 1995, Sweden has increased the tax burden from 50,2 to 51,4 of GNP. During the same time, Denmark has been fairly stable from 50,1 to 49,8, while succesful Finland has decreased the tax burden from 46,7 to 45,1%.

It’s not a question of needing more money in order to provide high-quality public services – it’s a question of a complete inability to contol run-away costs in different benefit and subsidy schemes linked to old-fashioned social democratic policies.

Both entrepreunership and high-quality public services risks being crowded out by these policies – if they are allowed to continue after the September 2006 elections.

FT.com / World / Europe – Sweden considering increases in tax

Bush to Europe

Foreign policy circles on both sides of the Atlantic are busy buzzing about the state of the relationship across the pond. Can it be restored to what it once was?

It can’t. The old relationship was one essentially shaped by a common threat in the form of the Soviet Union. The true father of the Atlantic Alliance was Joseph Stalin.

As the common threat disappeared, there was a failure to develop a common vision. And while Europe after 1989 become preoccupied with the building of peace by the sharing of sovereignity across the old continent, the United States after 9/11 become preoccupied with protecting its security also by a robust projection of its power on a global basis.

In Europe, it’s the building of peace that’s the agenda. In the United States, it’s the conduct of war that’s the agenda. We need to recognize that the relationship now has to be built on domestic political agendas that are more diverging than in the days of the old common threat.

If that’s done, there is no reason why the relationship should not be a solid one. It’s only together that Europe and America can have a truly transforming effect on the rest of the world.

When Bush comes to Brussels on February 22, it looks like being remarkable in two different ways.

It will be a day for the US President with more of the European Union than of NATO. In my opinion, that will be the first time this happens. Georg Bus will go to the Berlaymont Building tio see the President of the European Commission, and he will have dinner with the new Troika of the Union.

It will also be a day when the agenda is dominated by non-European rather than European issues, and this as well will be somthing of a novelty. It will be the Middle East peace prospects, developments in Iraq, the handling of Iran and the emerging issues of China that will be on the agenda. The only slightly more European issue will be how to react to the ongoing de-democratization of Russia, and possibly a brief mention of the Balkans.

In both these two respects, the vist might be a sign of the new partnership across the Atlantic. The European Union is a more important partner, and it is common action in the areas outside of Europe thar defines the changed relationship.

It’s worth watching the continuation.

European Surprise Ahead

A speech I gave in Prague – at the Microsoft Governments Leaders Forum – has already aroused some comments. While a lot of discussion is focused on the shortcomings of the European economies, I tried to describe some of the profound changes underway, and to describe the relentless competitive pressures now driving change from above as well as below in the different economies.

One of my observations was that we have a remarkably competitive manufacturing industry in Europe, partly as a result of these ongoing changes. The fact that it was an Italian-British helicopter – the US101 – that won the contract to supply the next generation of Marine One helicopters to the Presidents of the United States, in sharp competition with legendary Sikorsky Helicopters, is certainly a sign that there is some talent around. And while nothing is for ever, it must be noted that Airbus has now been receiving more orders for modern airliners than Boeing during a couple of years, and with the A380 is starting to be seen as not only the market but also the technology leader in a field for a couple of decades more or less completely dominated by the US industry.

In more general terms, we see how the European manufacturing industry is selling well across the world. In spite of a euro driven up by a dollar that’s falling down, it’s registering booming business not the least to the booming economies of East Asia.

But it goes without saying that much more is needed. My point in the Prague speech was that competition is driving change, that we now have a stronger increase in competition in the European economies than anywhere else in the global economy, and that we are starting to see how this changes the economic landscape.

Bildt Comments

Well, my intention wasn’t really to set up a blog, but rather to post a comment on one, but the technology took me to where blogs are set up, so I could just as well do it.

Otherwise I normally post articles and speeches at my website http://www.bildt.net. It’s only updated when I have something to add, but acts as an archive for what I have been writing or saying.

That’s also the place where one can subscribe to my email newsletters. They have been around since 1994, used to be once a week, but are now down to once every three weeks or so. They have the slight oddity of being in Swedish, but have a fairly wide readership. At present, approimately 20 000 subscribers are receiving the letter.

A Yugoslavia in Mesopotamia?

An old friend – former US Ambassador to Croatia Peter Galbraith – belongs to those arguing that it’s probably better to break up Iraq in a Kurdistan, a Babylonia and a Sumeria or something along those lines. He believes that the US administration is naive in believing that the Kurdish leaders really believe the diplomatic niceties on the integrity of Iraq, and that sooner or later the day of reckoning will come.

On the later point, I wouldn’t disagree. There are some remarkable similarities between the issues of Kurdistan and Kosovo.

But then Peter goes on saying that we should have learnt from the mistake of Yugoslavia, where the US until the very last keept insisting on the integrity of Yugoslavia in spite of the obvious conflict between primarily Croat and Serb ambitions.

The question is what the real lesson of Yugoslavia for the situation in Iraq is.

I would argue that one lesson is that new borders in regions of multi-ethnic mosaic are always borders drawn in blood. We don’t know how many tens or perhaps hundreds of thousands lost their lives in the decade-long and still ongoing break-up of the western Balkans, but we know that millions were forced to flee, and that areas that in the past were inhabitated by peoples of different religions and nationalities are now as mono-ethnic as can be, with ethnic cleansing have reduced large areas to little more than wasteland.

Peter might argue, that we should have negotiated a peaceful solution to the conflicts in Yugoslavia, but this neglects the small fact that we tried and failed. When the process was set in motion, the powers of arms was seen as the best to create facts on the ground, and when that had beeon done it could only very, very rarely be reversed.

In many ways, Iraq is more complex and dangerous than Yugoslavia was. None of the neighbours of Yugoslavia had the slightest interest in intervening its its bloody breakup, but virtually all of the neigbours of Iraq are likely to have an interest in intervening in a bloody breakup there.

In Iraq, it’s unfortunately easy to see a bloody battle over Kirkuk and its oil that might well draw in others, and that might spill over into ethnic conflict also in a Baghdad were the number of Kurds might well be in hundreds of thousands.

What’s then the alternative? Well, a long-term engagement by the international community in the area, safeguarding a federal structure that gives the Kurds substantial autonomy, but which gives more financial and other powers to the central authority than we had to do in the Dayton settlement for Bosnia. In all probability, this will require a long-term presence of international peacekeeping forces in the old Mosul province.

It’s like Kosovo. Once you intervene, you own the problems, and walking away is far more difficult than walking in.