Goodbye Globalisation: The Return of a Divided World
I met Elizabeth Braw during a recent appearance on Moncole Radio. She mentioned her forthcoming book which arrived just in time for my long-haul flight to Fiji and Tonga, from where I am writing this week. (More on that below.)
Braw’s thesis, that globalisation sparked a worker and social backlash, that has since manifested itself in democratic stress and great power competition with China, is somewhat obvious to all in 2024.
But she began working on this idea long before it was so universally clear — that outsourcing manufacturing and draining local communities of their livelihoods and cultural identity would have not just social and economic repercussions but democratic ones too.
Goodbye Globalisation is a quick read. It explores the costs of outsourcing business and dependence on China and Russia through the examples of Huawei (an issue I obsessively followed when I first arrived in the UK in 2016), the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline and the demise of UK manufacturing.
But where it shines is that it is told through first-hand accounts of local MPs, business leaders, policymakers and politicians as well as local civic leaders and civil servants who all either foresaw the dangers of shutting down factories in heartlands, or increasing energy dependence on Russia when these views were unfashionable and globalisation was considered not just an economic good, but a sexy sale to the public.
Braw’s book is a swift recap of the events that have led us to this point, although the question remains - is globalisation over, or just recalibrating?
Macron’s moment?
France’s Emmanuel Macron — not exactly famed for his consistency or ability to make the most accurate strategic assessments — has recently begun styling himself as Europe’s toughest supporter of Ukraine, even proposing sending troops to Ukraine.
Europe goes to elections this year and we should examine all posturing and positioning against that backdrop. NATO is also choosing a new leader, likely to be Mark Rutte of the Netherlands.
Nevertheless, Macron’s attempts to move the dial on Europe’s support for the war in Ukraine, in stark contrast with Germany’s reluctance, are gaining traction, mostly because he is sticking to his guns despite the opposition from Germany.
Eastern European figures, who want an alternative to Rutte and have been some of Ukraine’s most vocal supporters, are weighing in behind the French President.
So, is France now Europe’s newest Russia hawk? Not quite, and not yet, writes European political analyst Peter LTH.
What the Gaza pier tells us about Taiwan
The United States and European Union in partnership with Cryprus are leading attempts to get aid into Gaza, with the war now into its fifth month.
The humanitarian crisis is obvious. The Hamas-run health ministry claims more than 30,000 people have been killed since Israel began its retaliation over the October 7 attacks and the images depicting the physical destruction of Gaza, as well as the accounts of starvation and medical need are immense.
Domestically, this is also an ongoing political crisis for Western leaders, particularly those who rushed to ‘bear-hug’ Israel and its politically-tainted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the aftermath of Hamas’s attack.
Unbowed by the Western pressure and frustration, Netanhayu has continued his assault on Gaza, even as aid deliveries have slowed to levels that Israel’s own allies say are unsatisfactory.
That has led to efforts to bypass the current route of getting supplies into Gaza, via Egypt, where much of the aid is siphoned off (Egypt’s economy is suffering hugely from the war).
One creative approach has been to deliver the aid directly into Gaza by sea, via a temporary pier that would be constructed by around 1000 members of the US military - none of whom would set foot in the strip.
Building such a pier is lifted from a blueprint for how the US might respond to any conflicts that arise in the Pacific and was practised during a major military exercise in Australia last year.
The difference between neutral and non-aligned
What’s the difference between neutral and non-aligned?
I greatly enjoyed this piece from Euan Graham, who after the Australian ASEAN meeting in Melbourne, wrote about the difference between these two terms as the region faces the prospect of confrontation, and at the very least, heightened tensions with China.
As the saying goes, ASEAN countries don’t want to be forced to choose and the United States and its allies and partners don’t want to put ASEAN countries in the position of having to make a choice.
But Graham argues that doesn’t mean ASEAN countries should describe themselves as ‘neutral’.
This a good piece explaining ASEAN, the positions of its members, the distinctions between the two terms and why they even matter.
Antipodean bantz
As mentioned, I am travelling in Fiji and Tonga studying the region’s disaster resilience and readiness.
The trip is being organised by the Japan Foundation and the Australian Institute of International Affairs, which is run by Bryce Wakefield - a Canberra-based Kiwi.
Bryce is a super clever and extremely knowledgeable guy on foreign affairs. We first met at the GLOBSEC in Bratislava last year when I moderated a panel on the Global South on which he appeared.
But his ability to take my gentle teasing about Kiwi-land is one of his most delightful attributes, so much so, that during my last round he shared this map with me.
I laughed.
And that’s my list for this week.
This week, I joined Times Radio to discuss the week’s big topics in the UK.
Please do send me anything that’s caught your eye. And if you like my posts, please consider subscribing and sharing with others who you think might also enjoy this content in their life.