Без да навлизам в методологията на обществената оценка, събирам няколко основни качества на Георги Парванов, с които ще го запомня. Все пак, той бе и мой президент, макар, че така и не получих орден „Стара планина”.

Щедрият президент:

Лирическият герой на президента често спохождаше бизнесмени и политически другари със своя чувал ордени. “С 319 ордена “Стара планина” за един пълен и втори още недовършен мандат президентът Първанов успя за срине авторитета на отличието. Наред с наистина достойни българи с него бяха закичени и цял куп спорни фигури от прехода, свързани най-често освен със съмнителен бизнес и с бившата Държавна сигурност” пише Спас Спасов през 2010г. И наистина, девалвацията на държавните отличия ги обезсмисли и разми още повече обществената концепция за „особени заслуги”.

Защитникът на националните интереси:

Затруднявам се да си спомня моментите, в които президентската институция е била в основата на обществения консенсус по важен за страната въпрос. За сметка на това добре помня моментите в, които Първанов защитаваше чужди интереси. Сещам се за писмото до Молошевич и отказа му да подкрепи интервенцията на НАТО в Косово. На практика Първанов подкрепи продължаване на кръвопролитието, дирижирано от последния комунистически диктатор на Балканите – Милошевич.

„До Слободан Милошевич,
председател на Социалистическата партия на Сърбия
Уважаеми другарю Милошевич,
Бих искал да доведа до Ваше сведение позицията на БСП относно последните събития в Косово. Ние отхвърляме подхода на двоен стандарт и едностранно обвиняване на Югославия за създалата се ситуация в Косово… Парламентарната група на Демократичната левица декларира желание Народното събрание да приеме решение за неучастие на България във войната – нито пряко, нито косвено. Ние разглеждаме предложението за предоставяне на въздушен коридор на НАТО през България като много опасно за националната сигурност и за Балканите. Наивно и безотговорно е да се смята, че приобщаването към НАТО е гаранция за националната сигурност. Това би било авантюристично решение… ”

Друг пример за работата на Първанов по националните интереси е т.нар. от самия него „Голям шлем”, който циментира ролята на Русия в енергийния пазар и в политическия живот на страната за десетилетия. Но да не му се сърдим – Първанов като президент правеше това, което бе научил по времето на своята младост – да търси съвета на Москва и да слуша винмателно.

По връщането на откраднатите от СССР български държавни архиви обаче президентът не бе така настоятелен. За сметка на това по време на честите си посещения в Москва (на Запад нещо не му вървеше с поканите) искаше подкрепата на Руския патриарх по дела срещу България в съда в Страсбург. Иронично! Но това си е цяла парадигма за Външната политика на една страна и международните отношения.

Президентът в крак с времето

Критиката на страна, Първанов е човек с много добър усет на къде духа вятъра и се преориентира бързо. Когато стана ясно, че дори и левите европейски фондации ще отрежат подкрепата за БСП, той веднага прегърна членството на България в НАТО, срещу което до неотдавна беше протестирал.

За участието си в репресивния апарат на комунистическия режим „Държавна сигурност” самия президент казваше „от мен нито дума, нито ред”. Което малко след отчаяните му самопризнания се оказа меко казано невярно. Това обаче не му попречи, а напротив –направи го по-уверен да защитава устоите на хаоса на прехода, а именно влиянито на ДС в България след 1989 г. и трансформацията на политическата власт на БКП в икономическа; това, което положи основите на морална деградация, бързо забогатяване, вакуум в сигурността и цялото неравенство и несправедливост, които годините на дирижиран преход към пазарна икономика и демокрация в България докараха на всички нас.

Какъв президент ни трябва?

“Това може би е работа за човек, който ще може да ни представя не такива, каквито се страхуваме, че може да се окажем, а такива, каквито би ни се искало да бъдем.” Този цитат от Юлиян Попов е достатъчен. И доста добре стои предвид днешната смяна на караула на Дондуков.

Би ми се искало да има повече бизнесмени като Плевнелиев, повече политици като Плевнелиев, повече личности като Плевнелиев и повече държавници като Плевнелиев. Президентът Плевнелиев, за късмет на всички българи (не само онези, чиито кариери се ползват с милостта на ДС и нейните издънки), има мислене на държавник, а не на политик – т.е. не гледа към следващите избори, а към следващото поколение. Това което вижда, е това, което ни се иска да бъдем – хора със чиста съвест, със свободна инициатива, с ясни политики и реформирани институции.

В заключение

“Каквито и усилия да полага с подобно CV, Първанов няма как да избяга нито от имиджа на идеологическата си ретроградност, нито от същинската си принадлежност към миналото” (по Спас Спасов). Такава съдба и такъв лидер не заслужава дори и БСП.

Но нека помним Парванов с усмивка. Все пак, миналото трябва да се разбере, не е необходимо да се мрази. А е още по-хубаво, когато можем да му се посмеем

В международен план, през 2012 се очаква развързката на Арабската пролет, предстои да видим в каква посока ще тръгнат арабските държави, минали през революции. Те обещаха нова вълна от демократизация, каквато светът не познава през последните 20 години, когато Източна Европа бе в центъра на вниманието. 

Опитът с разпадането на комунистическия блок показва, че консолидацията на демокрацията е сложен процес и не трябва да се взема за даденост, предвид че старите режими (армия, номенклатура, тайни служби) запазват голяма част от невидимата власт за себе си.

В Египет предстоят президентски избори, а изглежда, че революцията там продължава, този път срещу властта на военните, които не са склонни да отстъпят от позициите си в икономиката и политическия живот. Либия трябва да се справи първо с разоръжаването на бунтовниците преди да започне да конституира нови политически институции и да организира избори. 2012 ще бъде критична година за режима в Сирия. Неговата промяна, би имала осезаеми последствия за баланса на силите в Близкия Изток и особено за Ливан, Израел и Иран.

Развръзката на арабската пролет може да има ефект върху международните потоци на инвестиции. Страните от Северна Африка и Близкия изток имат многобройно и младо население, голяма част от него с добро образование –това са хората, които поведоха протестите в края на 2010 и началото на 2011. Ниската цена на труда и огромните възможност за развитие биха насочили натам значителни инветиции ако се осигури среда на сигурност и политическа стабилност. Населенята на Европа и Източна Азия бързо застаряват и няма да е неочаквано паричните потоци да се насочат към демографски по-динамични райони.

2012 може да се окаже годината на големи промени за световните лидери. Избори предстоят в 4 от 5-те държви постоянни членки на СС на ООН (САЩ, Франция, Русия, Китай).

Изборите в САЩ– Обама се радва на около 40% популярност, но ако бъде преизбран , ще бъде първия президен след Франклин Рузвелт, останал на поста при такива високи нива на безработица.

Във Франция предстоят президентски избори през април. Това е много важно политическо събитие предвид сложността на кризата с еврото и необходимостта от силна политическа воля и последователност за справянето с еня.

В Русия най-вероятно Путин ще се върне очаквано на президентския пост, но започналата вълна на протести и последвалите смени на ключови държавни позиции предвещават по-интересен политически сезон в Русия от обикновено.

В края на годината и началото на 2013 Китайската комунистическа партия също ще смени ръководството си. Новата генерация китайски комунистически лидери ще е първото поколение, което не е участвало в и няма спомен от война. Това съвпада със засилващите се амбиции на Китай в Южнокитайско море и споровете с почти всички съседни държави, както и проблеми с малцинствата.

Президентски избори предстоят и в Тайван и Венецуела (ще се оттегли ли болния Чавес ако загуби изборите?), които са  ключови страни за международната политика.

Международните отношения ще бъдат силно повлияни от развитията около Иранската ядрена програма. В края на 2011 Иран извърши доста разгърнати военни учения в Хормузкия проток, от където минава 20% от международната търговия на петрол. Това предизвикателство за международната сигурност и икономика идва в момент на обтегнати отношения на САЩ със съюзника им Пакистан, оттегляне на военните сили на САЩ от Ирак и планирани съкращения на подкрепата за Афганистан.

Myanmar Reforms – promising but still fragile.

The military junta has ruled Myanmar (then Burma) since 1962. Since then, the resource-rich country has been turned into one of the most impoverished nations in the world. In a earlier post  I have expressed my doubts of any genuine drive for democracy that we can reasonably expect from the military dictators. Events in 2011 open a window for opportunity for the democratic international community to engage with the South Asian country in a way that would take it away from orbiting China and returning it to normal economic development, democracy and international trade.

“A momentum for change”

After the uprising of 2007 and the international attention that peaceful Buddhist monks; demonstrations brought to Myanmar, the junta changed tactics and promised a gradual transition to democracy. New constitution was drafted and elections were called at the end of 2010 . Of course, political opposition did not really participated and the process was imbued with a lot of veto points kept by the military regime. However the exercise brought an important change. In March 2011 Thein Sein was appointed President by the military dictator Than Shwe, who made a step back from the forefront of politics.

The new president so far acts as a reform-minded moderate, but no one really knows how many of the decision makers in the country are on his side and really want to open the way for democracy. Throughout the last year, the grip on the media has been eased, trade unions legalized, and Nobel-prize winner and opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi has been invited to meet the president. Her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD)  was allowed to register, which marked a watershed in Burmese politics.

Most notably, in the fall, Myanmar angered its huge neighbor and only supported China by freezing an enormous dam project on its territory, intended by the Chinese investors to produce electricity for export to South China. The official line of the government was related to environmental concerns and unpopularity of the project among local people. In the balanced language of eastern diplomacy and given the previous record of relations with China, which had a full mandate to free ride on Myanamr’s resources, this was something near a diplomatic war. There are 7 more projects like this and China is not willing at all to give them up. But the Step was a clear signal that something in Myanmar has changed.

Recognition

The democratic international community needs to recognize the change of tone of Myanmar and the willingness to start reforms. This was unthinkable 3-4 years ago, while now we see a President who is less of a hardliner. The real question of course is to what extend will civilian political power be allowed to take independent decisions and how strong will be the military. Iran also has a president, who is a strong figure, but the Supreme leader there is the one pulling the strings. In Turkey we find another similarity with the army behind the scenes (recently it was challenged by the civilian government) and its role of protector( it Turkey there is a reformist legacy to protect, to contrast Myanmar).

In any case the first steps of recognition already came when foreign secretary Hilary Clinton visited Myanmar on 1^st December. She brought with herself a sizable mission from the World Bank and the IMF to assess the needs of the country. This was the first visit at such a level since 1962.

In early January 2012 William Hague (UK’s Foreign Secretary) also went to Myanmar, which was the first such visit since 1955. He also spoke positively of last year’s developments but also noted that reforms are fragile and should be followed by allowing unlimited humanitarian access to the whole country (humanitarian assistance has been block even after the devastating floods in the past years).

Indeed, sanctions should not be lifted so briskly, but the world should show those of the decision makers in Myanmar who are reform-minded that the country may soon be on the way to overcome international isolation and gain access to the world market.

The fragile politics of Myanmar

The upcoming parliamentary by-elections on 1^st April will be the first test in this process. On 18^th November 2011 the National League for Democracy  said that it would formally re-enter politics and compete in the elections. Ms Suu Kyi will run for a seat, which would give legitimacy to a parliament heavily dominated by members chosen by the army. In a way, this is inevitable if the opposition wants to take part in the political process. The next test is what power a parliamentary represented opposition will be able to exercise over the government, appointed by the junta, and whether another round of reforms will follow.

Another test is the willingness of the government to free political prisoners. So far 900 have been released, but many stay behind bars and this week’s release of only 12 of them disappointed international observers.

The Strategic game in the Region

Many interests cross in the South China Sea

China of course does not look up to a democratizing country in its backyard. Three days before the visit of Hilary Clinton, Myanmar’s army chief was invited in Beijing by vice-president Xi Jinping, who, many say, may be the next president of China (due to be appointed this year). The two countries have extensive relations in the field of defense and trade and China will surely use a big stick, should its smaller neighbor plunges too fast in a reform process, thus challenging the “harmony” China is creating in the region.

Asia Pacific has for a long time been the highest security priority of the US. Europe should get used to this. Now that it is being officially articulated by the White House amid rising tensions in the South China Sea,  any change of strategic position may be a challenge to the status quo, where two great powers will be increasingly entangled over the next decade. On one hand is the economic domination of China among its neighbours and the ASEAN countries. On the other one is the US military supremacy and the defense agreements US has with a number of these nations.

Recently, Taiwan and Japan have closed multibillion dollar defense deals with the US. Perhaps these two countries, who have territorial disputes with China will remain the closest allies of the US in the region. But with its huge economic power, for China will be ever easier to extract concessions from the other countries in the region.

ASEAN has by the way offered Myanmar to chair the organization in 2014 as a recognition to the reforms the country is making. They came after a change of leadership, albeit a very carefully managed one. Another change of leadership is due this year and it will be at the high ranks of the Chinese Communist Party.

After World War Two the politburo was dominated by military men. Now it is dominated by businessmen. The new one however is likely to be dominated by young business oriented technocrats, some of whom have studied in Europe or in the United States, and of whom none has any military experience. This poses the question as to what the new civil-military relations in China will be an, more precisely,  how will the new Chinese leadership go about managing a crisis and how willing will it be to resort to military power.

Myanmar of course matters little when Chinese make their 5-year economic plan. But the wave of revolutions in the MENA region and the strategic game of South East Asia and the Pacific makes every democratizing country a very important building block of the international democratic community and potentially can change the delicate balance that has existed since the peaceful rise of China accelerated during the last 20 years.

Filed under: Democracy Tagged: 2007 Myanmar uprinsing, ASEAN, Aung San Suu Kyi, budhist monks uprising, Burma, China, defence, Democracy, Hilary Clinton, Japan, Myanmar, Myanmar reforms, South China Sea, South East Asia Security, Taiwan, Than Shwe, Thein Sein, UK foreign secretary, US, US defence in the Pacific, US secreatary of state, William Hague ]]> http://criticae.wordpress.com/2012/01/08/myanmar-reforms-promising-but-still-fragile/feed/ 1 criticae burma-map1 SOuth CHina Sea http://criticae.wordpress.com/2012/01/03/ioawa-republican-caucus-2/ http://criticae.wordpress.com/2012/01/03/ioawa-republican-caucus-2/#comments Tue, 03 Jan 2012 14:12:18 +0000 criticae http://criticae.wordpress.com/?p=1076 ]]> The Republican Party after George W. Bush has failed to produce convincing small-state, free-initiative conservatives with a far-reaching appeal among independents. While Mr. Romney may be the least conservative to qualify for the Republican nomination, it is a wide-spread view that he lags behind some of his rivals in the ability to mobilize a strong republican vote (at least stronger than the low 20s). Ron Paul’s appeal on the other hand reaches deep into the republican heart with his principles of small government, hands-off on personal matters and tax policies. He is also pro-life but at the same time does not oppose gay marriages, saying that this should be a matter not to be decided at Federal level. And it is exactly because of these that he has a strong appeal beyond the traditional GOP voter. Instead of threatening to strike Iran or proposing to double the Guantanamo (as some of the other candidates) Paul is making a strong campaign on rule of law and civil liberties. He is fighting to repeal the Patriot Act and has opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning.

Paul’s positions on the flawed monetary system and the enormous decision-making power of the Federal Reserve have remained unchanged. He continues to propagate limiting the powers and increasing the transparency of the privately owned American Central Bank.  This unpopular and radical position has been sustained in the last 20 years, which makes Ron Paul by far the most consistent candidate for the republican nomination. However, he may get a hard time explaining how he is planning to push all the changes through the divided Congress and how he will become an uniting figure for all republicans.

The reason I focus my attention on Paul and Romney is the following. As already stated above, the biggest discourse advantage of the former Massachusetts governor is that he is fighting against the democrat president, not against other republicans. By avoiding the petty in-fights that other candidates willingly enter into, he definitely gains the upper hand morally and this puts him in a better position to challenge the incumbent president if he is eventually nominated.

Ron Paul’s preoccupation with the real issues as opposed to intra-party wars reaches even further. Unlike his opponents he would not comment on the other’s qualities and past controversies so stubbornly. Neither would he mention Obama. (The closest he got is this:“People who are the President right now are said to be working on getting more involved in Syria.”). Mr. Paul will strike directly at what he thinks are the reasons for the popular discontent, the misfortunes of the Republican Party in recent years and the underlying causes for the ailing US economy. This narrative has not changed in the last twenty years and has gone even further in challenging some of the dogma that reproduce vested interest and erodes the foundations set by the US founding fathers (in his words).

Dirty tricks

Even though it is very interesting, the Republican campaign risks being overshadowed by a very unpleasant phenomenon – the negative campaign. A number of anti- Gingrich ads have appeared in the weeks before the Iowa caucus and thus helped him slide down in the polls.He has been even attacked for the way he runs his campaign, but got applause for the way he defended himself.

The negative campaign has not speared Ron Paul either, with disclosing controversial newsletters allegedly written by him in the 80s and 90s (he denies authorship or approval of their content).

The reason for this is the so called super PACs (political action committees), a powerful political weapon that can pour millions in a campaign without associating itself with any candidate. Having been called “the Holy Grail to unlimited campaign spending”, the super PACs have gained momentum because of the removed limit on corporate donations.

This was possible thanks to two Supreme Court rulings, which also opened the way for direct attacks on candidates. Whether that has opened the Pandora box remained to be seen.

The Right Candidate

Despite the brave ideas put forward and the higher exposure to malevolent scrutiny from PACs, the republicans still have a long way to go before finding the right candidate. The orthodoxy with which they are treating the key issues in their platforms suggests that we will see even more radical statements and heated debates.

Franklin D. Roosevelt was the last president who was reelected with unemployment as high as today's

In its latest edition The Economist called the republicans’ campaign ideas “cranky, extreme and backward-looking”.  And indeed, they have been defendant with quite a zealotry! In addition, the debates so far have pushed some candidates to the extreme while others had to recant previous statements and policies.  While Mr Paul vigorously support his radical idea to end the FED, Mr Romney flexibly made a step back on Obama-care (which in the words of the President took as a blue print what Romney implemented in Massachusetts). Rick Perry, who has been advocating for educating the children of illegal immigrants, had to take a tougher stance on immigration; Mr Gingrich had to renounce some of his ideas on climate change issues. The tax-raise, which is a traditional no-go area for GOP has been turned into a fetish, even though there is abundant evidence of many loopholes and that simplification of the current system of exemptions and tax breaks will be of much good (no mention of the deficit issue here, it deserves a special piece).

It seems that after all Obama has brought the change he promised. If the way politics in DC are done does not show this, one can easily see it in the confusion in the Republican lines. Yet Obama’s rating is in the mid-40s, and the economic situation of many US citizens is dire. Only Franklin Roosevelt was reelected with an unemployment rate as high as the current levels.

A seasoned political campaign is ahead. Waiting for the results from Iowa.

Read “The Republicans – Who wants to be a president Part 1″

Brave Ideas

So far, the republican race presented ample opportunities for important topics to be brought in the media focus. Some of these, like the military operations overseas and the health care system have been on top of the agenda throughout the whole mandate of President Obama. Others however strike the public with their braveness and sincerity.

Changing the US monetary system is by far the bravest of all ideas put forward by the candidates. It is of course not new. Its champion, the Texas congressman Ron Paul has been vigorously advocating for it back in 2008. Then he did not get many electors, but brought his educational campaign to the forefront of attention, despite attempts to be silenced as too radical and non-electable.

This time around Mr Paul’s attack on the policies of the Federal Reserve gains significant support among citizens and grass roots. His immense popularity among the ordinary Americans is evident from the remarkable success of his fundraising campaign (unlike Europe, in the US this is a major factor) – after all 61% of his donations came in as less than 25 dollar bits. For comparison, 60% of Mitt Roomeny’s donations came from individuals giving 2500 USD. That tells you enough about the mobilizing power of ideas and the importance of status quo challengers in this campaign. Just think Occupy Wall Street.

The Race

Throughout the last year there were a number of republicans who created an outburst of excitement and surged in the pools. Most of them however either flopped big time during the debates (Rick Perry) or had to stop their campaign because of various allegations (Herman Cain).

Mitt Romney and Ron Paul - both in the lead for the Republican presidential nomination. Photo businessinsider.com

Mitt Romney, a former governor of Massachusetts (2003-07) and a candidate for the republican nomination in 2008, entered the race early and maintained his leading position throughout the year. His support averaged 20% – far from enough to be called convincing, but enough to keep his name at the top of the list of potential republican nominees. His moderate tone and excellent background as a successful businessman and calculating politician has maintained his attractiveness among republican supporters. Perhaps this has been the most stable trend outlined in the last months especially after Newt Gingrich entered the campaign, but failed to change the existing dynamics in the polls.

However, it is exactly the carefulness of Romney and his “flexibility” on the core republican topics that may prevent him from gaining more support and eventually losing ground against his more consistent and firm- and sometimes aggressive opponents. Romney’s biggest advantage so far has been the positioning as a opponent of Obama, rather than a competitor for the republican nomination. However, it is likely that he has to take stronger and more affirmative positions later in the race.

The Iowa caucus

Tough stance may have to be taken sooner than expected, regardless of ads and attacks on opponents. Tomorrow’s Iowa caucus will set the tone for the republican nomination and the following states’ caucuses. Usually, the first weeks of the polls create a stable trend. This is why it is important who will the Iowans position as a leading republican candidate. So far the contest is tight with Ron Paul and Romney’s support around 21%.

One day before the Iowa caucus Romney, Paul and Santorum are ahead in polls

A big part of Mr. Paul’s  (at first surprising) support comes as much as from his policies, as from his integrity and firm principles. When the other candidates entangle themselves in difficult knots and flexible policy proposals , The Texas Congressman sticks to his libertarian principles. Paul campaigned on libertarian platform as a third-party candidate in 1988. Twenty years later he went for the republican nomination but was often cut off from TV debates because of his radical ideas. He is still campaigning on the same principles and even though they may seem radical, they have an appeal far beyond the core republican supporters.

See “The Republicans and who wants to be a President (Part 2)”

От Радой Ралин

ж

The five Nordic and three Baltic states have signed an agreement that enables them to pool their diplomatic resources around the world.

The pioneer diplomatic initiative was formally sealed in Helsinki Tuesday by the foreign ministers of Finland, Sweden, Latvia, Lithuania, Iceland and Estonia, and government representatives from Denmark and Norway.

“The agreement we signed today that we will send our diplomats to each other’s embassies, is very practical and it already functions,” Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet said at the so-called NB8 summit – of the eight Nordic and Baltic nations – hosted by Finland, as cited by the Swedish Wire.

Nordic states already share diplomatic missions and responsibilities in some countries and the memorandum of understanding signed in Helsinki formally expands the arrangement to include Baltic nations. “There are many agreements where one country represents another country in visa issues for example,” said Paet, noting that Estonian diplomats have worked out of Finnish embassies in India and Zambia, for instance.

According to Paet, the agreement is a good example of close cooperation under the NB8 framework, and Estonia welcomes this expansion of opportunities for diplomatic communications in countries where it has previously had no representation. The deal “will make it easier for the Nordic and Baltic countries to maintain a diplomatic presence around the world by enabling flexible and cost-effective solutions,” a joint statement said.

The agreement, signed during the annual Nordic-Baltic Eight (NB8) meeting in Helsinki, covers the practical aspects of stationing foreign service personnel in other Nordic or Baltic embassies abroad, in territories where a respective country has no representation, Estonian public broadcaster ERR reported.

I wish bigger member states like Germany and France who give the tone for the most important decision on European integration overcame selfishness and, like their northern neighbours share more resources in the field of high politics. After all, when you realise that  you are small it is may be too late. And while trying to show how big you are you could have missed the moment for the right step.