This Side Of The Blue: Week 49, 2022
This Side Of The Blue: Week 49, 2022
This week's newsletter featuring protests in China, Macron's misguided coddling of Putin, and some progress and regress in family courts. Plus the week's essential reading and listening.
Is The Past The Present in China?
Earlier this week I went to see a new exhibition at the National Gallery of Victoria (NGV) titled China - The Past Is The Present. A collection of work that juxtaposes historical and contemporary Chinese art. Notably, it also includes work by Chinese artists who were granted asylum in Australia after the 1989 Tiananmen massacre. As well as other exiled Chinese artists, who have used their work to protest and critique the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)
In recent weeks China has seen the largest protests since Tiananmen (with the exception of those in Hong Kong). For a government that so tightly controls its citizens this must be confronting. Since Tiananmen the CCP has struck an implicit bargain with the Chinese people – citizens will be afforded the ability to improve their own financial position, and provided with economic conditions to do so, on the understanding that they will continue to have no say in political affairs.
The government’s Covid policy of strict lockdowns has broken this bargain. Unlike other countries that moved to open up after the widespread distribution of vaccines, due to the inefficacy of the Sinovac vaccine – and potentially the discovery of a new mechanism of control – Beijing maintained strict lockdown procedures. With economic activity limited, many citizens have felt their financial positions going backwards. Yet, surprisingly for a government that is often incapable of admitting fault there has now been a response to ease restrictions due to these protests.
We will wait and see whether the Chinese public see this as an indication of a government capable of being responsive, or whether it will be seen as the CCP’s worst fear – a show of weakness that presents a crack in the party’s armour. Yet as the art on display at the NGV indicates, maybe the CCP’s implicit bargain of ever-improving incomes is not the only thing that the Chinese people want? Maybe these protests are a sign that they desire a greater degree of self-determination, and a greater say in how the country is run? How the CCP responds to that will be the true test of its flexibility.
Off-Putting Offers Of Off-Ramps
In the past week French President, Emmanuel Macron, made the suggestion that Russian needed to be given “security guarantees” in a new European security architecture. Macron implied that NATO’s presence “up to [Russia’s] doors” needed to be revised. This, of course, was immediately criticised by both Ukraine and the Baltic states.
For the Russia-bordering Baltics NATO’s presence in their countries is essential as it is the only thing that prevents Putin doing to them what he is doing to Ukraine. This is blindingly obvious. Yet Macron’s comments weren’t a case of him misspeaking, as he had previously suggested that Putin should be given an “off ramp” – a way for him to end the war without feeling humiliated. So why would Macron think this way?
First there is a structural reason why “off ramps” and “security guarantees” are enticing to states like France. For those within the political class their whole raison d’être relies on the existence of good faith negotiations. Being able to solve problems rationally and through compromise is what they are trained to do and what their positions rely on. But a country like Russia, that operates entirely by bad faith, and cannot be trusted with either its word or its signatures, presents a brute challenge to that. Unable to compute such a state, the bureaucratic class – and its leaders like Macron – has to insist that Russia can be reasoned with for their own sense of self. But as the Baltic countries know, this is an exploitable seam for Moscow.
Yet there is also something deeper about how we view “great powers” and men like Putin. There is an instinctive belief that these states and these men have a legitimate power that exists outside of the state system and their own behaviour within it. Smaller states, lead by “lesser men” (or god forbid, women) don’t have the same “natural” legitimacy. They simply have to suffer the machinations of greater states or men.
We also collectively have a strange sympathy for abusers, rather than the abused. We are enthralled by “big men”, who we see as the real drivers of human activity, even if it is violence and war that they are driving. Macron, seeing himself as a “man who makes history”, believes that he can be the one to restrain Putin through his own powers of negotiation and a sense that Putin needs to be coddled. Yet this is just more of the same competing egotism that rewards and creates instability.
Some Progress and Some Regression in Family Court Systems
Last week the UK’s family court system launched a pilot program to allow journalists to report on family court proceedings for the first time. The ban on reporting on proceedings may have initially been established with the good intention to protect the privacy of those involved in family court proceedings, especially children. Yet this evolved into a convenient excuse for the court to protect itself from public scrutiny. This has allowed some regressive, and often brutal, trends to become embedded in the system without proper public scrutiny.
But it was a mixed week for the UK’s family court system. With, according to The Guardian – A” mother whose children were removed from her care against their wishes after an unregulated psychologist said she had “alienated” them from their father has lost a high court appeal to have her case reopened.” What is extraordinary about this case is that it was presided over by the president of the family court system, Andrew McFarlane, who ignored his own recently issued guidance that sort to rid the system of unregulated “experts” pushing the dangerous and deeply misogynist concept called “parental alienation.” You can read my work on this concept here.
However, in Ontario there was some more positive news. A bill known as Keira’s Law passed the legislature that would provide training and education on intimate partner violence and coercive control for judges, justices of the peace, Crown attorneys, court assessors, social workers, and anyone who is a decision-maker in the family court system. I had the honour of my work being quoted in the legislative assembly by MP Effie Triantafilopoulos who drove the legislation. But the real work was conducted by the campaign of Jennifer Kagan, the mother of 4 year old Keira who was killed by her father after the family court system ignored evidence of the danger he posed. A phenomenon that is far too common.
Here in Australia, a previous pilot program called Lighthouse, was moved to become a permanent feature of the family court system. The program seeks to identify those cases deemed to be most high risk of family violence early and have them prioritised by the court system. The language of “high risk” is an important one as it recognises the nature of family violence cases where there is mostly a single perpetrator. The previous language of “high conflict” gives the impression of a dual responsibility.
Advancing An Indian Feminist Foreign Policy With Aditi Mukund
Grant Wyeth – International Blue
Earlier this week I launched a new regular feature for International Blue. Each fortnight I hope to write a profile piece on an emerging scholar whose work I find compelling. I think there are plenty of great researchers whose work doesn’t get the exposure it deserves. But rather than doing a straight Q&A, I thought the best way to approach this would be more through my own interaction and interpretations of their work and ideas.
The first profile is on Aditi Mukund from the Kubernein Initiative in Mumbai, India, and focuses on a report her organisation released earlier in the year titled Opportunities For A More Inclusive Indian Foreign Policy.
The 2022 Reith Lectures – The Four Freedoms
BBC Radio 4
This year’s Reith Lectures on the BBC have been been split into four parts this year on four different freedoms. The first two lectures have been broadcast, with two to come. The first was delivered by author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie on freedom of speech. With the second being delivered by the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, on freedom of worship (giving the lecture twice, once in English and once in Welsh). The next two lectures will be delivered by author and musician Darren McGarvey on freedom from want, and the final lecture will be by Dr Fiona Hill, former White House senior official, on freedom from fear.
Revitalising The Struggle For Human Rights
Gareth Evans - Project Syndicate
“Despite all the recent assaults on human rights, that evolution continues, with measurable progress worldwide toward abolition of capital punishment, decriminalisation of homosexuality, and gender equality. The brave street protests by women in Iran are beginning to make a difference. Long-neglected issues like modern slavery are under the spotlight as never before; and momentum to establish an International Anti-Corruption Court reflects the major attention now being given to the scourge of high-level official malfeasance.
But even if things may not be as bad as they often seem, they are bad enough. They require deep thinking from those who make human-rights policy and influence human rights policymaking. They require us to regroup and reassess our strategy and priorities: what do we want to achieve, and how should we go about achieving it?”
Explaining the Unthinkable: How the Protest Movement in China Took Place
Xiaoyu Lu – The Diplomat
“Nonetheless, the movement has revealed long-standing misinterpretations about Chinese politics. The censorship and information control, once thought as seamless, were in fact porous. The popular slogan “We don’t want lockdowns but freedom” in the movement was a partial inheritance from the one-man protest on Beijing’s Sitong Bridge in October. Information on the October protest was completely erased from the mainland’s social media, but it resurfaced during the protest movement. Memories of history also seemed to defy decades of propaganda and censorship, as the term “33 years,” referring to the 1989 Tiananmen protest, was used by protesters and bystanders to underline a sense of historical legacy and linkage.
Meanwhile, protesters made pre-emptive counterarguments before the authorities used the old argument associating public dissent with foreign intervention. People questioned the presence of “hostile foreign forces” after three years of strict border control, and voices calling for a “neutral and rational stance” attracted nothing but mockery and sarcasm. In short, the authority’s ideological methods used to suppress dissents in the past are losing their effectiveness.”
Kaja Kallas - Foreign Affairs
“Russia’s strategy is built around two weapons: pain and fear. The Kremlin aims to inflict pain on Europe by starving it of energy and to stoke fear of a nuclear war. The idea is to coerce Ukraine and its partners into a premature peace agreement that would legitimise Russia’s conquest of territory. Faced with pain, Europe can endure and even prosper. The EU and its member states have understood that they can no longer depend on Russian fossil fuels and are shifting rapidly toward other energy sources. Concerning fear, let us remember what U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt said in 1933: “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” If we allow nuclear blackmail to work even just this once, we will wake up in a much more dangerous world.”
Estonia Supports Ukraine Because We Know The Devastation Of Russian Imperialism
Kaja Kallas – The New Statesman
“My hope for 2023 is that we will have the moral clarity and political courage to end Russia’s genocidal war in Europe. The way to peace is to push Russia out of Ukraine. If we let its aggression succeed, much worse will follow. The cost for Europe and the whole world will be much higher than the elevated energy prices we are facing this winter. This is why I will take my motto for 2022 into 2023: gas and oil might be expensive, but freedom is priceless.”
Don’t Be Afraid Of A Russian Collapse
Kristi Raik – Foreign Policy
“Unlike Western governments, the Baltic states and Poland have been paying close attention to what Putin and the Russian elites actually say, including their clearly stated intent of reestablishing Moscow’s imperial sphere of control. The invasion opens up two perspectives: Either Russia violently reimposes its influence over its neighbours, starting with Ukraine and continuing with other states it formerly controlled, or Ukraine reaffirms its freedom and eventually joins the Euro-Atlantic community as a full-fledged member, like the Baltics and former members of the Soviet bloc have done. Anything in between—a cease-fire that freezes the conflict, for instance—will allow Putin or his successor to rearm, resupply, and give it another go. For Ukraine to secure its freedom, Russia must suffer a clear defeat in Ukraine.”
Why Putin Fears My Father Alexei Navalny
Dasha Navalnaya – Time
“The Russian regime has always been based on corruption and it is now based on war – for Putin, these are the two prerequisites for staying in power. That is why he is ready to destroy anyone who dares to expose them. And he treats my father with a personal hatred—as his most implacable opponent for many years.
Putin must be defeated. He is a threat not only to Russia and Ukraine but to the world. The very essence of authoritarian power involves a constant increase in bets, an increase in aggression, and the search for new enemies. In order not to lose in this struggle, we must unite.”
Indonesia’s New Criminal Code Turns Representatives Into Rulers
Sana Jaffery & Eve Warburton – New Mandala
“The new KUHP’s implementation is on hold for three years. And once it is implemented we are unlikely see an immediate widespread crackdown against dissidents of the sort seen in places like Turkey or Thailand. The code’s vague, nebulous provisions will probably be applied selectively and inconsistently. But this is precisely the point: uncertainty invokes fears and stifles dissent. The code’s provisions can be thought of as warning shots, designed to compel critics to adjust their behaviour.”
Arvind Subramanian & Josh Felman – Foreign Affairs
“If the Indian authorities are willing to change course and remove the obstacles to investment and growth, the rosy pronouncements of pundits could indeed come true. If not, however, India will continue to muddle along, with parts of the economy doing well but the country as a whole failing to reach its potential.
Indian policymakers may be tempted into believing that the decline of China ordains the dizzy resurgence of India. But, in the end, whether or not India turns into the next China is not merely a question of global economic forces or geopolitics. It is something that will require a dramatic policy shift by New Delhi itself.”
Matt Johnson - Quillette
“While “The End of History?” isn’t exactly an inspiring tribute to the virtues of liberal democracy, Fukuyama appears to believe the possibility of boredom at the End of History is a small price to pay for the spread of liberal values. He contends that liberalism is the best way to maintain social peace in diverse societies, protect human dignity and autonomy, and promote economic growth. “Liberalism sought to lower the aspirations of politics,” he writes in Liberalism and Its Discontents, “not as a means of seeking the good life as defined by religion, but rather as a way of ensuring life itself, that is, peace and security.” Although the modesty of liberalism has made it a universalisable and sustainable social and political framework—it has lasted for hundreds of years now—this feature is also a bug when it comes to generating a strong commitment to liberal values. Members of the Muslim Brotherhood zealously tell their followers that “Islam is the solution,” while liberals can only weakly promise to create the conditions in which people can pursue whichever solutions work best for them.”
The Inside Story Of Liz Truss’s Disastrous 44 Days In Office
George Parker, Sebastian Payne & Laura Hughes – Financial Times
”Truss and Kwarteng had been planning what they would do with power for years. In a 2012 book titled Britannia Unchained, they railed against a “bloated state, high taxes and excessive regulation” which, they argued, were holding the country back. The tract also included the observation that “the British are among the worst idlers in the world”, a jab that came back to haunt Truss in the media circus around her political downfall.
Both elected to the House of Commons in May 2010, the two quickly became friends, immersing themselves in the world of free-market think-tanks and rightwing seminars. Truss, born in 1975, grew up in a leftwing household where Margaret Thatcher was despised, but the rebellious future premier admired Thatcher’s economic stance and her willingness to stand up to the Soviet Union. Years later, Truss, like her heroine, rode atop a tank in an attempted show of defiance to Moscow.
Kwarteng was also born in 1975, to parents who emigrated from Ghana as students. His mother was a barrister and his father an economist, and Kwarteng excelled academically, attending Eton College, Trinity College, Cambridge (where he won a double first in classics and history), Harvard University as a Kennedy Scholar and Cambridge again, where he earned a PhD. He later worked at JPMorgan Chase and a hedge fund. Self-doubt was not part of his make-up.”
Having bitten off a little more than I can chew of late, this week’s playlist is themed Sleep. Something I hope to be able to catch on up over Christmas.