WATCH OUT FOR THE PUTINS AMONG US

This follows Part 1, posted on 2 March 2022

a.???The treat from within

Western countries present the broader confrontation, caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine, as a ‘battle between democracy and autocracy’. Given the domestic repressions of its people by the Russian regimes and the ones it supports, like in Belarus and Kazakhstan, the framing is partially valid. Supporting the Ukrainian people, including with military aid, is justifiable. Whatever the validity of Russia’s concerns and the alleged or real failures of Western countries to take these serious, there is no justification for what is rapidly becoming a disproportionate and indiscriminate assault on Ukraine.

But if the West (and others) stand firm in defense of democracy and open, inclusive societies, we need to take more serious this battle does not play out only in Ukraine. Our ‘open’ societies have been and continue to be, under attack, from within, primarily through populist politics and far-right extremism.

There is indeed a strong convergence between populist politics and Putin’s old Soviet-style authoritarianism. Both construct nationalistic and white supremacy narratives around a golden age of grandeur. This, it is said, has been lost because of ‘liberal’ values and politics that give too much space and voice to women, are too accepting of refugees, migrants, and people of colour in general, and denigrate religion. Feminism, acceptance of different sexual orientations, same sex-marriage etc. have also caused the decline of the traditional (patriarchal) family as basis of the social order.

“Making Russia great again”, “making America great again”, “making Britain great again”, “making France great again”… it is the same story with only surface variations. To reverse that weakening of national identity and values, we need a ‘strong leader’, of the hyper-assertive and pro-gun Alpha type, mostly, though not exclusively, male.

We have seen strands of this in Brazil, in Turkey, in Hungary, in sections of the Tory-party in the UK, in the far-right Presidential contenders in France, and of course in Trumpian republicanism. Putin’s ranting (and cold face and eyes) is no different from Trump’s ranting (and cold face and eyes). The tactical difference is that populists are smarter than Putin. They are better at mobilising a convinced followership, like Hitler and Milosevic also could. They are more sophisticated in playing our emotional registers of fear, uncertainty and frustration, and at constructing narratives the truth of which cannot be questioned because any questioning simply confirms the existence of a ‘liberal’ conspiracy. Putin and his ex-KGB cronies rely too much on Stalin-style fear and repression. Theirs is 20th, not 21st century authoritarianism.

The danger to democracy is acute in the US. Its Republican Party is now overtly the party of white supremacy and an intoleratnt, religion-inspired, conservatism that visibly seeks to dismantle democracy. It continues to repeat the lie that the 2020 election was stolen, enacts measures in different States to make it harder for Democratic-leaning groups to vote, claims that critical race theory is a creator of social problems rather than an attempt to face them, allies with armed far-right groups and overtly talks about the incarceration and even killing of elected politicians that do not support them. If this is not proto-fascism, then what is? Remember the public admiration Trump has for Putin, and how Trump sought to weaken NATO? If the Republicans take more seats in the November 2022 elections, the Biden administration will be hampered, also in its engagements related to Ukraine.

On this side of the Atlantic, Boris Johnson messages to the Russian people that we know this is not their war and ask them to protest against it. Correct, and it will become painful to see ordinary Russians hurting most from the economic impacts of the sanctions. Yet, at the same time, legislative proposals are on the table in the UK intended to limit the right to public protest and subjecting it to harsher punishments. If passed, should a future UK-leader take the country to war on the lies of ‘weapons of mass-destruction’ or something else, residents in the UK will not be able to protest as they could and did in 2003. While it is nice to hear that the UK is finally going to act a bit more seriously on the London ‘laundromat’ of dirty money, the influence of Russian oligarchs and the issue of Russian money in UK politics, this has not been driven by a return to fundamental democratic values but by suddenly heightened reputational risks. If the UK government was a real defender of integrity, which is a foundation of an open and democratic society, it would also drastically restrict the links between elected politicians and business interests (before, during and after office) and drastically reduce the huge legal costs of a libel-case in the UK, which is used by wealthy corporations and individuals (supported by greedy lawyers) to deter and intimidate investigative journalism, research or whistle blowing.

?(In Switzerland, under Article 47 of the banking law, journalists in the country risk prosecution for possessing, let alone publishing, private banking data – effectively blocking investigative journalism into unsavoury banking practices.)

Nationalist populism is not limited to the Anglo-Saxon world. We see it also in the Netherlands, France, Hungary, Poland, Italy etc. One remarkable phenomenon has been how, within a week, the populist right around the world, which admired Putin for his strong and nationalist leadership, has been forced to distance themselves. It is an ironic replay of the late 1950s, when the full scale of Stalin’s violence became clearer and Soviet tanks crushed an uprising in Hungary. Then it were the European Marxists and Communists who had to distance themselves from their earlier admiration of the Soviet model.

Populist leaders and their entourage also tend to be closely linked to global corporate interests, including those that lobby against tough measures to curb global warming and species extinction. Declining use of Russian gas and oil and resulting higher prices will present a great opportunity to push for a continuation and expansion of the global oil and gas industries!

Nationalist populism remains a very active treat to open and inclusive societies and democracies. For some years now, our intelligence services have warned that far-right terrorism poses a bigger danger than Islamist terrorism. If we are standing up to defend democracy, let us address the threat from within.

2. Populism and xenophobia

Nationalistic populism breeds on anti-foreigner, anti-refugee, and anti-migrant sentiment. It is wonderful to see Poland, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, and the EU at large opening borders to what will be a much larger refugee inflow into Europe than in 2015. But it is difficult to dissociate this from the hard anti-refugee policies and - attitudes in particularly eastern European states after 2015, and in the UK in recent years. Less than a year ago, Poland started building a fence on its border with Belarus to keep refugees out. Hungary, North Macedonia, Greece, Bulgaria have their versions of fences. The UK overall remains very hostile to refugees, as the controversy over visa for Ukrainian refugees shows. Prior to the war in Ukraine, orders had been given to coastal operators in the Channel to push boats with refugees and migrants back into the sea (fortunately there is strong opposition to this in the UK). Legislative proposals are on the table to criminalise refugees trying to enter via irregular routes and even to set up detention and ‘processing’ facilities in other countries, like the infamous ones on Naura and Manus Island that Australia has used for years. A year ago, Denmark revoked residence permits for Syrian refugees on the grounds that it was safe now to return - in flagrant contradiction with the well documented abuses of those who tried.

For years now, the EU as a whole has been very hostile to refugees and economic migrants. The EU is funding isolated and high security detention and processing centers in Greece and continues to fund a corrupt Libyan coast guard that stops and returns refugees and would-be migrants to centers in Libya whose atrocious human rights violations have long been documented. Worse, some EU countries have tried to criminalise voluntary organisations rescuing people at sea. Criminalising compassion and saving lives???

We seem to have forgotten that our ‘European’ war eighty years ago displaced some 40 million people. Incidentally, 40.000 of these, mostly from Eastern Europe and the Balkans found refuge then in Syria, Egypt, and Palestine, cared for by the Middle East Relief and Refugee Administration. Europeans feel our generosity is overstretched, yet refugees in impoverished Lebanon make up more than 25% of the population, and economically struggling Jordan about 9%.

This is not an argument for a complete open-door policy. But, as has been said repeatedly, for respect and restoration of the right to asylum and for expanded channels for regular migration that actually work i.e. without huge administrative barriers and high costs.

It is questionable therefore that this sudden open-door policy for Ukrainians indicates a change of heart and of policy towards greater human compassion. Racism, and other discriminatory practices, remains rife. Shockingly, there is evidence of Ukrainians denying Asian and African students studying in Ukraine access to the refugee trains heading for Poland, some Polish border guards not allowing them through if they get there, and some being abused and attacked by Polish nationalists when they are in.

Have no doubt: if this becomes a protracted crisis, as it will, this welcome to (white) Ukrainians will also go sour. Then their presence will be used, again, by nationalist populists, to push for intolerant policies and regimes.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz talks about a ‘new reality’ caused by the war in Ukraine, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen about a ‘watershed’ situation. Will it also be a watershed moment in acknowledging that populist politics are authoritarian at heart and pose a serious threat to our open, inclusive, democratic societies? Will it be a watershed moment in our narratives and practices related to ‘refugees’ and ‘asylum seekers’?

?