Everything appears set for Zimbabwe dictator Robert Mugabe to make his red carpet entrance to EU's Africa summit meeting in Lisbon on December 8. UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown's boycott has not affected the other EU-member states decision to attend. For seven years of postponed meetings between EU and Africa because of Mugabe is finally over, wrote Svenska Dagbladet Africa specialist Ola Säll (SvD, 07.11.24).
It was hardly the EU's intention, but already in the beginning the summit meeting was a triumph for Mugabe. Gordon Brown stays home and is therefore accused of being petty and intolerant. On the other hand, Mugabe has succeeded to drum up support from other African presidents whose almost 50 unanimous voice declared: No Mugabe, none of us. Therefore EU succumbed. The prohibition against Mugabe and his government to make the trip to EU was lifted.
The biggest stain in the Africa Union's face is not because there is a dictator in Africa. That has always existed. No, AU has destroyed its good name through solidarity with known dictators. Who can trust AU's loud declarations of an African renaissance grounded on democracy and human rights?
Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany states that the Lisbon summit would be " an opportunity to discuss human rights". EU member states' foreign ministers are unanimous at being "clear and tough" against Mugabe. But if Mugabe has not listened to EU in the last decade, why should he suddenly do so in Lisbon where he is backed by several other African presidents?
It just seems that EU would have no chance. Mugabe excels in the limelight, the latest of which was at the UN where he compared Bush and Blair to Hitler and Mussolini. The other unforgettable event was the UN environmental conference in Johannesburg in 2002, where a state-organised violence ended in Zimbabwe. The African presidents gave its support and applauded Mugabe more than any other speaker.
It would be a spectacle in Lisbon. Mugabe has already the leading role where he would call Europeans both racist's and imperialists, while other African leaders applaud that he dares. He may embarrass himself before the Europeans' eye but in the African presidents' eye he has once again proven his greatness.
(Translated from Ola Säll's analysis of the summit meeting, SvD, 24 Nov. 2007)
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Friday, November 9, 2007
Nordic Battlegroup: A good Start for Swedish Defence Policy
A Nordic Battle group shall have completed seven weeks of intensive training in Sweden's northernmost forests before it is deployed in real war zones. It will be Sweden's contribution to the European Union's rapid deployment force and the start of a new defence policy. Sweden's security will depend upon cooperation with other democracies, Dagens Nyheter reported Thursday, Nov. 8th.
An earlier report states that the Nordic battle group consists of 2,350 Swedish soldiers, 220 Finnish, 150 Norwegian, 80 Irish and 50 Estonian. The battle group will be used for conflict prevention or for humanitarian assistance during catastrophes. Sweden will foot the bill for 345 million crowns, or more when actually deployed.
According to DN's Thursday editorial, Sweden's national security situation is good, thanks to the EU and the Eastern NATO's expansion. "The likelihood for an armed attack of any form is therefore remote. The defence powers have a clearer focus towards the international efforts."
Such assumption is however being questioned. The world has in many ways become more dangerous these later years. Some examples:
- An authoritarian Russia gears up and shows a higher profile in foreign politics.
- USA has become more isolationist after its setback in Iraq, less inclined to outside intervention.
- Unstable states with elements of militant Islam such as Iran and Pakistan are acquiring nuclear capacity.
- Terrorism, refugee outflow, large-scale criminality and environmental catastrophes create a new diffused
threat.
The adjustments in the Swedish defence goes slow and rests on the uncertain commitment that EU can offer collective security. After the fall of the Berlin wall, the world was temporarily safe, "the end of history" as American political scientist Francis Fukuyama wrote.
After this however came the civil war in the Balkan, genocide in Africa, Islamic terror killings, USA's problematic setback in Afghanistan and Iraq, a new big power competition with element of arms race and rivalry over limited resources.
Instead of the liberal democracy's triumph, we have a potential dangerous combination of old and new threats. Traditional geopolitical contradictions remain-India vs Pakistan, the Arab world against Israel, Russia against Western Europe, Islam vs West - at the same time that other dimensions appeared.
The Nordic battle group's military exercise is equipped with the latest material gadgets. Its final exercise is a simulated training in a foreign land, with eye on democratic elections. It is a realistic framework for future foreign contribution, at the same time that the group is prepared for actual war and therefore relevant for Sweden's defence. Most important of all is the international connection. Norway, Finland, Irland and Estonia are a part and Sweden cooperates with United Kingdom on strategic leadership.
Of all the money we (taxpapers) have invested in defence since 1989, this has been the best use, concluded DN.
(Translated/Edited from Dagens Nyheter, 7-8/11/07)
An earlier report states that the Nordic battle group consists of 2,350 Swedish soldiers, 220 Finnish, 150 Norwegian, 80 Irish and 50 Estonian. The battle group will be used for conflict prevention or for humanitarian assistance during catastrophes. Sweden will foot the bill for 345 million crowns, or more when actually deployed.
According to DN's Thursday editorial, Sweden's national security situation is good, thanks to the EU and the Eastern NATO's expansion. "The likelihood for an armed attack of any form is therefore remote. The defence powers have a clearer focus towards the international efforts."
Such assumption is however being questioned. The world has in many ways become more dangerous these later years. Some examples:
- An authoritarian Russia gears up and shows a higher profile in foreign politics.
- USA has become more isolationist after its setback in Iraq, less inclined to outside intervention.
- Unstable states with elements of militant Islam such as Iran and Pakistan are acquiring nuclear capacity.
- Terrorism, refugee outflow, large-scale criminality and environmental catastrophes create a new diffused
threat.
The adjustments in the Swedish defence goes slow and rests on the uncertain commitment that EU can offer collective security. After the fall of the Berlin wall, the world was temporarily safe, "the end of history" as American political scientist Francis Fukuyama wrote.
After this however came the civil war in the Balkan, genocide in Africa, Islamic terror killings, USA's problematic setback in Afghanistan and Iraq, a new big power competition with element of arms race and rivalry over limited resources.
Instead of the liberal democracy's triumph, we have a potential dangerous combination of old and new threats. Traditional geopolitical contradictions remain-India vs Pakistan, the Arab world against Israel, Russia against Western Europe, Islam vs West - at the same time that other dimensions appeared.
The Nordic battle group's military exercise is equipped with the latest material gadgets. Its final exercise is a simulated training in a foreign land, with eye on democratic elections. It is a realistic framework for future foreign contribution, at the same time that the group is prepared for actual war and therefore relevant for Sweden's defence. Most important of all is the international connection. Norway, Finland, Irland and Estonia are a part and Sweden cooperates with United Kingdom on strategic leadership.
Of all the money we (taxpapers) have invested in defence since 1989, this has been the best use, concluded DN.
(Translated/Edited from Dagens Nyheter, 7-8/11/07)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
