Search Results

What does this mean for the Republican ticket? The Republican ticket is now complete for the forthcoming presidential election. Contrary to 2016 with the selection of a mild-mannered, soft-spoken and evangelical born-again Christian, Donald Trump has chosen the freshman Senator from Ohio, J.D. Vance, as his vice-presidential pick. Vance presents the advantage of adding youthful energy to the ticket and is a committed, full-blown MAGA believer. With the zeal of a convert, Vance has positioned himself as the future of the MAGA movement, with a clear strategy for the long-term success of the Republican Party recast as the populist MAGA Party. With his nomination as the VP choice, his priority will be to help Donald Trump get re-elected in November. For a detailed analysis of his beliefs, look at the New York Times article of June 13th. The very recent assassination attempt on Trump has fundamentally changed the dynamics of the campaign. With the wind in his sails, Trump can rely on Vance to surf on the wave of enthusiasm and positive energy coursing through the Republican Party as they kick off their nomination convention today in Milwaukee. Since the extraordinary events of last Friday, Trump has signalled his newfound desire to unite the country, and he has remained uncharacteristically subdued since the failed attempt on his life, raising hopes that such an existential event will change him not only as an individual but also as a potential future president. He indicated that he is rewriting his acceptance speech with this in mind. However, the choice of Vance as Vice-President nominee seems to indicate that Trump's newfound moderation is a more tactical move to persuade Democratic-leaning swing voters to vote for him rather than Biden. Vance has always been an outspoken and aggressive advocate of the MAGA firebrand policies. Immediately after the assassination attempt, Vance declared : " Today is not just some isolated incident. The central premise of the Biden campaign is that President Donald Trump is an authoritarian fascist who must be stopped at all costs. That rhetoric led directly to President Trump's attempted assassination." I'm not sure that this type of statement will be well-received by swing voters or the American people at large. Nonetheless, the nomination of J.D. Vance clearly illustrates the colour and focus of the 2024 Trump campaign, which, for all intents and purposes, is progressing in a much more professional and strategic manner than either of his previous campaigns. The Democrats have their work cut out for them, in particular, as they have committed themselves to "lower the temperature" of the political debate, and they will have to find a way to continue criticising the Republican ticket without leaving themselves exposed to accusations of aggressive, divisive rhetoric. Under normal circumstances, this would be a tall task; with a weakened Biden who does not have the support of the Democratic Party, it is increasingly looking like a bridge too far.

The assassination attempt on Trump changes everything. It really has come to this. Although the US is no stranger to political violence over its 248-year history, the assassination attempt on former President Trump is an unfortunate and dramatic sign of the times, where divisive rhetoric and hatred fuelled by racism and extremism rule the day. First and foremost, all responsible participants in the US political debate, all without exception, have to clearly, forcibly and unequivocally condemn with the utmost energy this heinous act. There is no place for violence, none whatsoever. Today, we must have the courage to say, as the doctors who operated on President Reagan in 1981 after the attempt on his life, "We are all Republicans". As Charles Dickens so eloquently wrote in his 1856 novel, "A Tale of Two Cities" : “ It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair .” We are in the winter of despair, as the world seems inevitably to be sleepwalking into a new era of darkness. An age for which we are all responsible. As free world citizens, we all have a choice—and we can make our opinions heard, not through political violence but through political discourse. The end of the world as we know it is not inevitable; on the contrary. It's easier said than done. In today’s world, division, hatred, and anger fuel political debate and encourage extremism disguised as simple “common-sense solutions.” This results only in more fear and undermines the fundamental foundations of our democratic societies. Rather than wringing our hands in despair, we must recognise that the path towards a spring of hope depends on us recognising the dangers ahead and answering the call to arms to win the war of ideas of darkness over light, hope over fear, freedom over subjugation. Lest there be any misunderstanding in my wording, the afore-mentioned "call to arms," be it in this article or on the cover of my recent book, is symbolic. As per the Merriam-Webster dictionary, it is "a summons, invitation, or appeal to undertake a particular course of action, as in a political call to arms." In today's climate, it is crucial to do everything possible to promote unity, avoid division, and not fall into the easy trap of blaming our adversaries for the unforgivable actions of one isolated individual. It is only just and fair that we mark the gravity of the moment with a truce, even if it is only for one day, to halt the political campaign and reach out to our opponents and to former President Trump to signal our heartfelt support, compassion and respect. President Biden was right to do just that, speaking directly to "Donald" for the first time in years. We must never forget that innocent bystanders died in yesterday's horrific act, and nothing, I mean nothing, can justify their deaths. Tomorrow is another day, and the campaign will regain its rightful position as in any democracy, where people can express different opinions within the limits of the law and the expression of free speech. But mark my words. The assassination attempt on former President Trump changes everything. We all have the responsibility to choose our words carefully and ensure that our rhetoric and actions do not foment and stoke political violence, as it has in the past, notably on January 6, 2021.

R.I.P. American Democracy The Supreme Court has just given Donald Trump a James Bond type of licence to kill. Not only does Donald Trump have absolute immunity for any "official acts" he committed whilst President and most importantly plotting to overthrow the government and deny the American people their democratically expressed choice but furthermore any future president will enjoy the same quasi absolute immunity - offering Donald Trump all the more incentive to get re-elected as president. It is impossible to deny the importance of today's decision of the Supreme Court, kept silent until the very last day plus one of the current term. It is an eminently political decision from an extremist court, totally committed to a far-right agenda espoused by the Heritage Foundation and the deceptively bureaucratic sounding name of "Project 2025" and giving their champion former President Trump a momentous victory and a step-up to his being able to be at the very least a dictator for a day. One only has to have a look at Trump's "Truth Social" messages to understand the magnitude of the decision handed down today. Herewith his quote (rendered in lowercase contrary to the original version: " The supreme court decision is a much more powerful one than some had expected it to be. It is brilliantly written and wise, and clears the stench from the Biden trials and hoaxes, all of them, that have been used as an unfair attack on crooked Joe Biden’s political opponent, me. Many of these fake cases will now disappear, or wither into obscurity. God bless America! The crux of the decision hangs on the definition of "official acts" vs. "unofficial acts". To add insult to injury, and to paraphrase one of his most memorable phrases from the recent debate : "I don't understand what he means, and I think he doesn't either." This court will never allow Trump to be prosecuted for his grave offences committed around the events of January 6th, 2021 for all intent and purposes declaring his is above the law, which is anathema to the core, heart and soul of the Constitution, let alone all that the American revolution was fought for. Lest anybody try to qualify the decision as balanced and taken purely after careful, non-partisan and balanced judicial review remember that two of the six Justices on the majority of this decision are clearly and openly in favour of Donald Trump and his political views and values; namely Justices Alito and Thomas who both personally and aided and abetted by their wives flew flags upside down on January 6th 2021 as a sign of distress and accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars as gifts from arch-conservative donors. Justice Sotomayor's scathing dissent is both dramatic and foreboding: " The President is now a king above the law. (...) With fear for our democracy, I dissent". The path is clear for Donald Trump, if he is re-elected, to implement any and all sinister plans he has, starting with the infamous "Project 2025". He once famously quipped that he would be "Dictator for a day". He will in fact be Emperor for life and be able to use and abuse the office of the President to put an end to American democracy just shy of its semiquintcentennial celebration. The one and only way to prevent American democracy from disappearing under the cloak of Trumpian imperial splendour is for the American people to go to the polls and vote for Joe Biden, the only other name on the November ballot liable to be able to beat him, thus upholding the sacrosanct principle "we the people, for the people, by the people". For all intent and purposes, all constitutional guardrails are now defunct and null and void. American democracy is moribund, virtually dead, and at best is a conditional democracy that will depend on the good nature and honourable character of its future presidents. Today's's decision is partisan, reflecting the six-justice supermajority of the Supreme Court. All pretence of trying to find a consensus has been thrown out the window along with the corpse of American democracy. Under normal circumstances, such a partisan ruling is destined to be short-lived and would be reversed or modified by a future, more balanced court. The question is whether the American people will allow such a court to come into existence, as the next president will most likely be able to nominate two if not three new justices, cementing the set-up of the court for an entire generation. The Imperial Presidency, courtesy of the Supreme Court This past week has underlined just how high the stakes are in the upcoming election and has further injected raw, primal fear into the equation. But hope must prevail over despair as the future of the United States of America as we know it is in the hands of the American people and I for one, trust that the American people will do what is right. If I am mistaken, then we have to be prepared to hear the future president proclaim, *My name is Trump, Donald Trump".

A New Era with the Far-right at the Gates of Power. One of the most consequential results of the recent European parliamentary elections was President Macron's decision to dissolve the French National Assembly following his party's dramatic loss to the list of the far-right "Rassemblement National (RN)". The subsequent legislative elections will be held in two rounds of voting on June 30th and July. If the opinion polls are to be believed, the RN is on the cusp of power, within striking distance of achieving an absolute majority in the new chamber. Jordan Bordella, Candidate of the RN for Prime Minister (source; program of the RN, June 2024) The young and dynamic Jordan Bordella (28 years old) is the RN's candidate for Prime Minister. The party's president, Marine Le Pen, is concentrating on the Presidential Elections due in the spring of 2027. President Macron's radical decision is deemed by some a risk too far as it offers the RN the chance to capture the reins of power, an unthinkable event just a few years ago at the beginning of his first presidential mandate, soundly defeating Marine Le Pen in the 2017 presidential elections with over 66% of the popular vote in the second round. The surge of the Far Right is not a unique French phenomenon in Europe, as illustrated by the good performances of other parties in Europe, such as the AfD in Germany. However, given the history of the RN in France, this development has far-reaching consequences. President Macron is banking on a better performance of his centre party, "Renaissance," as traditionally, European parliamentary elections are protest votes against the government in place with a relatively low turnout. However, he may have miscalculated, as the strength of the RN does not seem to be waning in view of the forthcoming legislative elections. Populism, particularly the far-right variety, has a bad name in European political circles despite the ever-increasing number of voters deciding to support populist candidates, even if a closer analysis country by country presents a much more nuanced picture. Poland, for example, is moving away from a populist government, whereas, in other countries, the impact of the populist parties is mitigated by the coalition type of political systems in place, such as in the Netherlands. The French case is unique because France is one of the largest countries in the European Union, and the French-German partnership as the "engine of Europe" has always been of prime importance. Macron is clearly a pro-European President. When he was first elected, he slowly walked towards the Louvre Pyramid to the sound of Beethoven's "Ode to Joy", the anthem of the European Union. He made a significant pro-European speech at the Paris Sorbonne University in 2017. He followed this up with a passionate declaration for strengthening the EU in a recent interview with the prestigious "Economist". The RN is distinctly of the opposite opinion. As recently as 2017, it advocated for a French exit from the EU and abandoning the Euro. Even if it has since dropped these radical measures from its program, it remains staunchly anti-European with an emphasis on a "Europe of Nations", which is code for undermining the power and influence of the EU in favour of the Member States' national governments. Furthermore, the RN has historically strong ties with Russia, having received funding from a Russian bank with Putin's blessing in 2014 to the tune of 6 million EUR. The loan was finally repaid in 2023, conveniently before the 2024 European elections, but nonetheless, the damage was done. It may, therefore, not seem so surprising that the RN has been lukewarm in supporting Ukraine in its war against Russia and wanted until last week to withdraw from NATO's integrated military command. It has softened its position on both counts to gain voters in the forthcoming elections. However, such a swift change can be seen as political opportunism. This demonstrates that the RN has been masterful in recreating a more nuanced image in the past years since Marine Le Pen took over from her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, in 2011. Slowly but surely, she has pushed for a major rebranding of the party (known in French as "dédiabolisation", i.e. "demonization" dropping the name of "Front National" to that more consensual and less threatening "Rassemblement National" RN. The FN was founded by Marine Le Pen's father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, as the "Front National" (FN) in 1972 and burst onto the political scene in the 1983 municipal elections, with Jean-Marie Le Pen winning 11.3% in the 12th arrondissement of Paris and following up with 11.3% in the 1984 - yet already - European elections. After much internal strife and internecine struggle, Jean-Marie Le Pen qualified for the second round of the 2002 presidential elections only to be soundly defeated by President Jacques Chirac, who won 82.21 %; Chirac famously refused to participate in the traditional debate between the two candidates qualified for the second round. Jean-Marie Le Pen and his daughter Marine Le Pen The roots of today's RN are very much in the French neo-fascist movement of the 1970s, the "Ordre Nouveau" (New Order). Jean-Marie Le Pen was notably convicted in 2009 and 2016 of denying crimes against humanity for qualifying the Nazi gas chambers as "a detail of history". Since then, under the presidency of Marine Le Pen, the party has moved away from any clear fascist rhetoric, focusing primarily on a solid anti-immigration position in a country where Muslim immigration from previous French colonies such as Algeria and Morocco remains at high levels. The Rassemblement National has a neo-fascist heritage and strong roots in the French extreme-right nationalist move-ment post-World War two. The RN is not the only party in Europe with genuine neo-fascist roots. The Brothers of Italy's origins are in the 1946 neo-fascist movement of the Italian Social Movement MSI, but the party's leader, Giorgia Meloni, became Prime Minister of Italy in October 2022. Despite following hard-line right-wing policies domestically, Meloni has adopted a more traditional conservative right-wing stance in Italy's foreign policy, much to the satisfaction of the international community. The short-term future of French politics remains uncertain as the RN is not guaranteed to win an absolute majority on July 7th, and Bordella has declared that he would not be a candidate for the post of Prime Minister if the RN only has a relative majority. Furthermore, in reaction to the threat of the RN, the French left-wing parties have cobbled together a new "Front Populaire" type coalition to thwart the rapid ascension of the RN. They are credited with an expected good performance ahead of Macron's Renaissance party. The French constitution confers many powers to the President, who will remain firmly in control of foreign policy whatever the results of the legislative elections and Macron may be tempted to take a leaf out of President François Mitterrand's book, who, for the first time under the Fifth Republic formally accepted a so-called "cohabitation" in March 1986 when his socialist party lost its majority in the National Assembly forcing his hand to select the leader of the Right, Jacques Chirac as Prime Minister. An even more apt comparison is the second cohabitation of 1997-2002 following the dissolution of the National Assembly by then-President Jacques Chirac, who unexpectedly lost the subsequent legislative elections, ushering in the Socialist Prime Minister as Prime Minister. In both cases, the experience of cohabitation did not work out in favour of the party controlling the government as they were voted out of power in the following elections, demonstrating that governing is always more complicated than being in opposition. The RN is acutely aware of historical precedent and will think twice before accepting a formal cohabitation with Macron as Head of State if it does not have sufficient guarantees to lead a successful government. Macron may call the RN's bluff and accept such a cohabitation, hoping that the RN will fail in government, reducing the chances of Marine Le Pen in 2027 becoming President. Much will depend on the relative strength of the left-wing coalition, which is also perceived as extreme albeit to the left, given the presence of the President of "La France Insoumise (France Unbowed", Jean-Luc Mélanchon. This explains why Macron is hoping to thread the needle and keep control of the government by presenting his Renaissance Party as the only party that is not on the extreme fringes of the political spectrum; a claim made all the more plausible that the hitherto right-wing conservative party "Les Républicains" formally entered into a coalition agreement with the RN for the first time, destroying the concept of Republican sanitary cord against the far-right (and incidentally causing a spectacular split in the party). The burning question is the attitude of the various parties between the two rounds concerning constituencies where their original candidate has been eliminated. Will there be a united front against the RN, or will some candidates be convinced (or coerced) into calling to support the RN? In any event, the RN may well be in a position to take over the reins of the government and show its true colours as a governing party. Will it be a neo-fascist wolf in sheep's clothing or merely a little red-hiding hood destined to be devoured by the other parties? The last bastion may be President Macron himself, who may demonstrate that centrism is the only way to defeat the extremes of populism, from wherever it comes. Will Jupiter follow in the steps of the Sphinx, i.e., President Mitterrand, in taming the wolf in the hen coop?

The much valued exit poll published by the BBC projects that the Labour Party has won the anticipated landslide victory with a majority of 170 (on a total number of 410 seats), falling just shy of beating the record set by Tony Blair in 1997 who had a majority of 179 seats. The Conservatives fell to their lowest number of seats in their history with an estimated 131 seats. Exit poll publish at 10pm UK time (source the BBC) The Liberal Democrats will take over the position of third largest party from the SNP (with respectively projected tallies of 61 and 10). This will be a big disappointment for the SNP who are paying the price in Scotland for the financial scandal that has plagued them in the recent past as well as changes in their leadership, not to mention that they also have suffered from being in power for many years (since 2007 first as a minority government and then subsequently as a majority government) and the Scottish electorate felt that is was time for a change and wanted to ensure that Labour would get as big a majority as possible. The far-right Party "the Reform Party" led by arch-Brexiteer Nigel Farage has surpassed expectations with a projected 13 seats with Nigel Farage finally entering the Westminister Parliament as a MP after seven unsuccessful previous attempts. He will surely be a thorn in what is left of the Conservative Party who will quickly be seeking a new leader. Farage may be tempted to join the Conservative Party given his success in today's poll. But the big winner is of course Sir Keir Starmer who in addition to his knighthood has now become Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland. The party will definitely go on all night long in the Labour ranks but Starmer will be under no illusions as he knows that the hard work is just starting and that even before the final bottle of champagne has been drunk, he will have to prove to the British public that his new government will be able to not only deliver what was promised (which was very cuatious) but moreover exceed expectations.

After 14 years of chaotic Conservative rule, this time tomorrow will most probably see a new Labour government. The only question that remains open is the size of the much expected Labour majority. If Rishi Sunak is somehow able to prove everybody wrong then it would most probably be the miracle of all miracles and Sunak would be the father of all "comeback" kids. But it isn't over until the fat lady sings. Nonetheless if the polls are right she is already singing a requiem for the Conservative Party. The incoming Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, if he is indeed elected, will not have an easy task and will have the shortest honeymoon period of all prime ministers. The vote today is an overwhelming anti-Tory vote and not a pro-Labour vote per se and Starmer will have to earn the trust of the electorate. His declarations have been dare I say - very conservative for a Labour politician and he cannot afford to disappoint by being too careful.

Despite attempting to alleviate concerns about his fitness for office, mistrust of Biden continues to gain traction in the US. The press and pundits are increasingly calling for the President to withdraw and the first elected Democrats, albeit at lower levels, are also expressing similar concerns vocally. As July the 4th is a public holiday in the States, Biden is hoping to be able to regroup in view of an interview he plans to give to ABC news tomorrow. Whether this will enough is doubtful. Although officially the motto is to give Biden "space" and "time to think" this seems to indicate that his exit from the race is imminent and irrevocable. Biden himself and his inner circle are adamant that they will not withdraw and that he is the best person to beat Trump. It is a very fluid situation that can escalate very quickly and next days will be critical for the President's survival.

The second round of the legislative elections for the National Assembly in France take place on Sunday. Th clear winner of the first round, the National Rally (NR) is aiming to reach the magic number of 289 seats to be able to form a stable government with an absolute majority. However, faced with such an eventuality, the other parties have re-created a Republican Front to prevent this from happening and based on the latest polls, the NR will only be able to win between 190 to 220 seats which is far from their stated goal. If this were to be the case, we can expect a renewed period of instability as the Republican Front is not meant as a formal governmental coalition and it will be difficult to find a candidate for prime minister who will be supported by all of the Republican Front parties. President Macron will paradoxically continue to play an essential role in setting the country's direction for the next three years as he is the ultimate decision- maker to name a future prime minister.

As three large nations face seismic change : is this the end of an era? History likes to play jokes on us. and sometimes timing is everything. Tomorrow is independence day in the United States with a President Joe Biden who is hanging by the skin of his teeth at the top of the Democrat ticket for the November presidential election. Whilst the Americans will be enjoying hot dogs and fireworks, the British Prime Minister will be most probably be put in the dog house by the British electorate along with his fellow conservatives and it will be firework for Keir Starmer and the Labour Party. Last but not least, this coming Sunday President Macron will realise that he was barking up the wrong tree when he impetuously dissolved the National Assembly and with the loss of his majority he will have been hoisted by his own petard. Three consequential nations on the world stage, confronted with seismic changes and an uncertain future. Of the three, the UK elections attracts the least attention internationally. Not only because Keir Starmer has the charisma of a local bank manager, but probably also because the demise of the Conservatives has been on the cards for quite some time now. In particular once then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson took a joke too far and decided that partying in Downing Street was the right thing to do, whilst the Queen was all alone on one side of St.George's Chapel in Windsor Castle for the funeral of her beloved husband Prince Philip, scrupulously following the afore-mentioned Covid rules, Apparently what is fit for Boris Johnson is not fit for a queen. Johnson then added insult to injury by lying about it all (and trying to beat Donald Trump at the "politician-who-lies-the-most-game). Once Johnson got the ball moving downhill, Liz Truss took over as Prime Minister only to see the dream of her political life lasting less than the shelf life of a lettuce but she still had time to crash the British economy before she was pushed out unceremoniously by the men in the grey suits (i.e her fellow parliamentary colleagues). She was replaced by Rishi Sunak (the second Prime Minister in a row to be selected by the ever dwindling limited membership of the Conservative Party in the UK) who did his best to prove that he was the living example of Peter's Principle whereby he was promoted to a position far above his competence and skill levels. He wasn't able to stop the continuous downfall of the Conservative Party, just as he wasn't able "to stop the boats" from coming over from France with desperate immigrants. He banked his premiership on the ingenious "ship off the afore mentioned immigrants to Rwanda scheme" an example of a man of the people such as Sunak trying to convince the rest of the country that Rwanda is the epitome of Human Rights and always has been, damm the 1992 genocide. By the way wouldn't it be better by the same token for the UK to withdraw from the pesky European Convention on Human Rights ? He kicked of what has proved to be a calamitous six week election campaign by standing in an absolute downpour outside of Downing Street with no umbrella or protection as if rain was a very rare commodity in London, very quickly turning into a forlorn wet dog before rushing back into Downing Street to presumably thank his attentive team from sending him out in such weather. Decidedly he must feel at home enjoying the best Britain has to offer in terms of summer weather as he left early the D-Day commemoration of June 6th to give a TV interview. After all there were practically no more living survivors of D-Day so maybe nobody would notice and/or mind ? You have to admit, looking from abroad, the British really do have a unique and refreshing sense of humour. Not only do they cut off their nose to spite their face by voting for Brexit (thank you Mr Johnson) but they then go on to see if they can seize defeat from the jaws of victory by committing their future to a clown of a Prime Minister soon to be followed by his band of merry minstrels. A band of merry minstrels. If you are interested in learning more about recent events in the United Kingdom, please take a look at the following articles : Across the Pond, in Washington D.C:, President Joe Biden is not faring any better. After his disastrous performance at the first presidential debate in Atlanta last week, Calamity Joe scared the living daylights out of all his supporters and people who reluctantly were leaning to vote for him. Whilst he managed to show a much better side of himself the next day at a campaign rally, the question of his advanced age and seemingly reduced cognitive skills has become not only an issue for the Democrats but a genuine matter of State. Should I stay or should I go? Less than a week after the debate debacle, it increasingly looks as if Biden is losing the plot and will be forced to withdraw sooner rather than later. It is not so much the fact that the press has turned against him. It is not the first time and he has proved them wrong before. However, the matter this time round is substantially more important as the stakes are so high for the future of democracy in the US. I have advocated to give Biden time to assess his position and see if he can indeed turn things around in his favour. I have also advocated quite clearly not to throw him out with the bathwater. But ultimately as I have always said, we must trust Joe Biden and have faith in him being able to take the right decision. The latest reports indicate that Biden himself is clear eyed and understands that his candidacy is threatened. He has to prove to the country, to his close advisers and family but also to himself that he is still up to the task. The next few days will be critical with a meeting scheduled with the Democratic governors and a major interview with George Stephanopoulos from ABC news on Friday. Given the increasing pressure from Democrats in Congress and at the higher levels of the Party, he simply has to outperform all expectations this week if he wants to have a chance to hold on to his top place on the Democrat ticket. The mere fact that th eword is getting out that Biden is not oblivious to the gravity of the situation and that his comments were then vehemently denied by his campaign indicate that we are slowly and maybe not so slowly, but surely moving into the direction of a withdrawal of his candidacy. If the polls indicate a shift away from Biden in the coming days, irrespective of his performance on TV or lack thereof, his situation will become undefendable. I continue to believe that Joe Biden is able to put the country before his personal interests and if he comes to the conclusion that his position is indeed no longer tenable, then he will withdraw in a manner that befits his character. It would make a lot of sense for him to withdraw in favour explicitly of his Vice-President, Kamala Harris who was a part of his administration and who can legitimately claim to take credit for all the accomplishments of the past three and a half years. If Biden is able to withdraw in favour of Kamala Harris and keep the Party united behind her it would be an act of tremendous courage, fortitude and skill. It remains to be seen if the Party and the other hopefuls are prepared to be as disciplined as this scenario suggests. The chance of becoming President is an opportunity that few people would give up on without a fight. The risk of a lack of discipline is a raucous open Convention that will split the Party and leave it in tatters to fight the General Election. President Macron : Et Maintenant? (And now?) President Macron is faced with a dilemma of his own making. Contrary to President Biden, even in the worst case scenario he will not be forced out of office and will remain Head of State until the next presidential election in 2027. If a week is a long time in politics, three years is an eternity. The question is if it will be an eternity in hell for Macron or only in three years in purgatory. Much will depend on whether the National Rally, a Party that represents everything that Macron despises and has fought against all his political life, will manage to cobble together a stable government after the second round of parliamentary elections this coming Sunday. Insofar that all of the other political parties have decided to stay untied against the National Rally in line with the principle of building a Republican Front against the far-right National Rally should deprive the NR from achieving the holy grail of an absolute majority. But in France, like in all other democracies, it is the people who have the last word and despite the instructions of the various political leaders, it is not guaranteed that the French electorate will decide nonetheless to give the NR their chance. In any event, the surge of the NR in recent years is a major political phenomenon for France that goes far beyond the similar progress of other populist parties in Europe. The history of the National Rally as a Party, its roots in neo-fascism, the declared anti-semitism of Marine Le Pen's father and the radical anti-immigration policies advocated by the NR are such that have little if any comparison to other countries in Europe. The Conservatives in the UK have moved to the right of the political spectrum in the recent past. However, the Reform Party in the UK is even further right and much more explicitly anti-immigration and racist. The leader of the Reform Party, Nigel Farage of Brexit fame, uncharacteristically let the mask slip during the recent UK general election campaign by declaring his support of Russia and Putin over Ukraine which even for far right enthusiasts in Britain was a stepp too far. Marine Le Pen has had more practice toning down the program of the National Rally and has managed to avoid any similar "slips of the tongue" similar to the one that Nigel Farage has committed in Britain and that her father was fond of. But despite her best efforts of window dressing, the NR remains a Reform Party type of animal, fundamentally racist and with a strong undercurrent of anti-semitism that up until very recently with close financial links to Putin's Russia. Not so long ago, during the 2017 presidential campaign, Marine Le Pen was suggesting that France withdraw from the European Union and abandon the Euro. Even today, some of the policies of the NR are deemed to be extreme and potentially unconstitutional. In particular the notion of giving "national preference" to all French citizens of "pure souche", i.e "purebred". Even French citizens who have dual nationality would not be considered genuine French citizens and they would not be allowed to work in certain governmental positions as their allegiance to France would be tainted. There is a strong suspicion that the NR under Marine Le Pen is simply a wolf in sheep's clothing and that once in power, they will show their true colours. President Macron is in the unfortunate position of being term-limited and whatever happens he will not be able to seek re-election in 2027. Marine Le Pen, however, eats, prays and loves the 2027 election and the possibility of having her protégé, Jordan Bordella, head the government as Prime Minister is not her end goal but only the next stepping stone to achieve her real goal of the presidency. This is the context of the political situation in France today and each Party will have this in mind. The NR has already softened its more extreme policies - whilst not giving up on the sacred principle of "national identity". The Party portrays itself as representing the little folk, the forgotten ones who have been left aside by past governments and similar to other countries, the NR is promising to come to their aide with "common sense solutions". This remains a very potent message, even if is based on a very simplistic world view. If the NR is able to force a cohabitation with President Macron and they will in effect run the government, the French President will remain as Head of State and as such continue to have considerable power and authority conferred to him by the Constitution, primarily in the area of foreign policy but not only. In such a scenario Macron will most probably try to give enough rope to the NR so that they will hang themselves and therefore be a much reduced force when it comes to the 2027 presidential elections. HIs task will nonetheless be made all the more difficult as he will potentially in effect become more and more of a lame duck president the closer he gets to 2027. Added to this, the other politicians from all sides will be jockeying for influence and power in view of the 2027 elections. I believe that President Macron's preferred option is to prevent at all cost the NR from getting even a small taste of power and that he will name as Prime Minister a so-called Republican from one of the other parties. He sees it as almost a god-given mission to protect France from the evils of the NR so he would only go down the road of accepting a cohabitation with the NR if he has no other option. It remains to be seen if the French people will give his the luxury of remaining master of his own destiny and of that of France.

Do not throw the President out with the bath water. Thursday, June 27th, 2024, will go down in history as the worst performance ever at a US presidential debate. President Joe Biden was an unmitigated disaster. Before the debate was even over, full-blown panic broke out amongst the Democrats, and a media frenzy soon followed. A couple of days later, major newspaper editorialists and well-respected political commentators were calling for Joe Biden to withdraw from the race to let somebody else take on Donald Trump in order "to save democracy". Even the hallowed "Economist" magazine in London declared "Joe Biden should now give way to an alternative candidate". An Example of the Media Frenzy, Time Magazine Cover June 28th 2024 Right after the debate I had the opportunity to give my immediate thoughts in the post : where I notably urged caution and described the pitfalls of trying to replace Joe Biden on the Democrat's ticket, especially if he didn't want to go willingly. After careful consideration, I respectfully have to disagree with most of the pundits, esteemed editorialists and hallowed news magazines. This is neither presumptuous nor hubris on my part. I have been preoccupied with the danger of Donald Trump for quite some time now, as demonstrated in great detail in my book "2024: A Call to Arms". My main thesis whereby it is vital for the safeguard of American democracy and a stable and peaceful word order that we all keep our eyes wide open and call a spade a spade. Donald Trump is a fascist. Full stop. Period. Moreover, he is a convicted serial mythomaniac with very limited intellectual skills, which makes him easily manipulated by more malfeasant forces, both within America and abroad, who seek to use him to further their malicious designs. Once the useful idiot is no longer useful, the fascistic forces that he will have unleashed will devour him as well, leaving the world in an even worse state. At the risk of repeating myself, America has not yet woken up to the real threat of unwittingly killing off democracy by embracing authoritarianism. What happens in America matters for the whole world—when the American Eagle dreams of “The Great Dictator” goose-stepping us into bloodshed and misery Charlie Chaplin-like, the world needs kindness and gentleness. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck, albeit a brigade of ducks with red hats, matching ties and confederate flags on their tails, carrying tiki torches and waddling in harmony to a distinctively Wagnerian tune.    It is time for everyday Americans to grasp the true meaning of the forthcoming elections. The choice is not between the lesser of two evils or similar candidates, lacking in key qualities to be president Tweedledum and Tweedledee-like. We have to end with the false equivalencies and stop pretending that Trump is a "normal" and legitimate candidate. Already today, the press, also on the liberal side, is treating Trump as a regular candidate, comparing his policies to those of Biden and allowing the false equivalency to set in between a truly extreme, fascist candidate who has been twice impeached, who has attempted a constitutional coup, who has instigated an armed insurrection against Congress and the American people, who has been convicted for sexual assault by a civil court in New York by a jury of his peers, who has been convicted for fraud and who suffers from apparent cognitive deficiencies. It is not a question of voting for “a lesser of two evils”, as Trump is in a category of evilness all by himself . In other words, “a disgraced, twice-impeached, four times indicted liable for sexual abuse, defamation and financial fraud ex-president” vs “an experienced, family loving, respectable ex-Seantor and the current successful president”. Any references to the concept of evil are intended not as religious dogma but based on the secular moral concept. [i]   “Evil exists in the way that courage, malice, or honesty exist; not as a mysterious supernatural force that is capable of taking over a person, but as a character trait and as a moral property of actions.” The often-mentioned “clash of good vs. evil” in this context has more to do with Trump’s lack of moral compass compared to Biden’s moral character. The 2024 election is not only a referendum on democracy, Trump, or Biden. Like all elections, it is a choice — but in 2024, the choice is between two radically different visions for America: one that will lead the nation down the dark road of authoritarianism and fascism and one that will build a new democracy based on unifying all people of goodwill who want to defend the Constitution, the rule of law, essential freedoms, and liberty. Amid the increasingly loud calls for Biden to withdraw in order "to save democracy" as he is no longer fit to be President (despite having been one of the best presidents in modern history with a record to prove it), I am all the more shocked that the same press outlets, pundits and commentators are not calling out with equal vigour and earnestness for Trump to withdraw and for the Republicans to replace him on the Republican ticket because he is also unfit to be president. After all, he seeks to destroy the almost 250-year American experience of democracy to satisfy his ego and protect himself from having to face righteous justice from the courts for the suspected numerous crimes he has committed, not least attempting to overthrow a legally elected president with a far-reaching conspiracy culminating in the January 6th 2021 attack on the Capitol. The only remaining rampart against the tragedy of re-electing Donald Trump is re-electing President Joe Biden for a second term. Contrary to what is becoming common truth, anything else is fantasy and will only weaken the prospects of defeating Donald Trump, which is at least something all of us calling to save democracy in America can agree on. Even if President Biden "does not walk as well as he used to, does not speak as well as he used to or does not debate as well as he used to," he is not only the best candidate for president; he is the only candidate . He is fond of saying, "Do not compare me to the almighty; compare me to the alternative." This is all the more poignant and relevant as the alternative is Donald Trump, whose complete lack of any morals and fundamentally flawed character is only surpassed by the clear and present danger he represents to the essence of American democracy. We should focus the spotlight on Donald Trump and never give up on exposing him for what he truly is, the evil he represents and never cease calling a spade a spade. Otherwise, we will be digging the grave of American democracy, and we will not even have the freedom anymore to cry our eyes out in despair in a future Trumpian dictatorship. Granted, President Biden's performance in Atlanta cannot be underestimated or swept under the carpet. But let us not make the mistake of throwing Joe Biden out with the presidential bath water. The unwanted consequences would seal the fate of the incommensurable values of liberty, equality, and freedom that we all cherish so dearly. Please read or a more detailed analysis of the risk of a second Donald Trump presidency Addendum : Congratulations to Mika Brezinski from stating the case for Joe Biden with such clarity and passion this morning on "Morning Joe". One does not have to be close to the Biden family to understand right from wrong: [i]  Russell, L. (2014) Evil. A Philosophical Investigation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

President Macron in a bind of his own making. President Macron's audacious gamble to dissolve the French National Assembly and call for fresh parliamentary elections has, at the very least, been successful in one important aspect: the turnout is estimated at 67.5%, an exceptionally high level practically never seen never seen since 1981 for a similar type of election. The main question before the first round was the relative strength of each of the three main parties, respectively coalitions, namely "Le Nouveau Front Populaire " (left-wing; Ensemble (Centre) and the "Rassemblement National -" (extreme-right, National Rally - NR). The opinion polls predicted a large victory for the NR and the results of the first round of voting confirmed their historical performance leading all other parties with an estimated 33% of the votes, which would translate into anywhere between 255 to 295 seats in the new national assembly. The absolute majority is set at 289 as the chamber counts a total of 577 seats. A few comments at this stage are necessary : The exceptionally high level of turn out demonstrates that the French electorate feels very concerned by these elections and wishes their voice to be heard. The high turn out gives all the more weight to the results. The score of the NR includes their new allies and affiliated party lists. The President of the conservative party, "Les Républicains", Mr Eric Ciotti made the extraordinary move of signing a formal agreement with Marine Le Pen and this move initiated a split in his party which officially took measures to destitute him as leader. The wing of the party that refused this alliance presented their own candidates and received just under 10% of the vote. The new alliance of the left-wing parties (named "Le nouveau front populaire or "New National Front" in reference to the original national front of 1936) arrived in second place with 28.5%, i.e. a projected range of seats from 120 to 140. This alliance of the communist party, the France Unbowed party, the socialists and the green party known in France as the ecologists can consider their results as acceptable, albeit slightly lower than what they could reasonably have expected. The French parliamentary election takes place over two rounds. In the unlikely event that a candidate has received more than 50% of the votes in any given constituency, that candidate wins the seat outright and there is no second round election for that seat. Any candidate that received more than 12.5% of the votes in his or her constituency is qualified for the second round. The winner of the second round for any given constituency is the candidate that received a simple majority of the votes. Traditionally, most second round elections are between two candidate's that reflected the bi-polar left/right split in the French political spectrum. THis year, however, is a different situation all together as there will be a large number of second round elections where three candidates will be present. One from the New National Front, one from the Centre (Ensemble or "Together" )and one from the NR. This is what is known as a "triangular" election. Triangular elections set the stage for a considerable amount of horse trading and last minute agreements between parties so that the least well positioned candidate withdraws and pledges to support one or other of the two best placed candidates. The latest numbers estimate that there will be a record number of 285 to 315 of such triangular elections. To put this into perspective at the last legislative elections there were only 8 in 2022 and one in 2017. This is due to the high turn out and the particular situation with three strong parties above 20%. A record number of triangular second round elections will take place on July 7th The intense horse trading that will take place at the beginning of next week will determine the alliances and agreements both at the national level and at the local level that will determine the outcome of the second round. The fundamental unknown factor is how willing are the traditional parties in France willing to work together to prevent the extreme-right from achieving an absolute majority next week. Are they prepared to respectively withdraw their candidate in favour of the better placed candidate liable to be able to beat the NR candidate thus building a "Republican Wall" or Republican Front against the extreme-right ? This will be no easy task as it requires politicians from hitherto bitterly opposed parties to work together to pursue what should be the more important task of preventing a far-right party with strong fascist roots from governing the country for the next three years. Whilst it is true that President Macron will remain head of state and in the particular French system of government will retain considerable authority and power, in particular in the area of foreign policy and matters that pertain to the overall interest and national security of France. As such, no major changes are expected in relation to the French position on Ukraine for example although any requested military credits will have to be approved by the new national assembly. However, the historical significance of the victory of the National Rally cannot be ignored. It is truly of historical proportions and represents a seismic change in French politics that also is most probably a fatal blow for the centre political philosophy advocated by President Macron. This will also undoubtedly have an impact on other countries as well. The last time a sovereign nationalist extreme-right party won parliamentary elections was in 1815 no less. The roots of the NR do not extend so far back in history but are unfortunately based on post second world war neo-fascist ideals of a particular virulent nature. Despite the rebranding that Marine Le Pen has been able to operate since becoming leader of the then -Front National FN in 2011, there remains a significant underbelly of racist, and anti-semite ideal simmering under the surface. These feelings of hated and division are wrapped up in the virginal cloak of protecting the national identity but the targets of this new brand of extremism are the immigrants most of whom come form Northern Africa where once France rued as a colonial power in countries such as Algeria, Morocco and other parts of the Maghreb. One of my previous posts explains in more detail the resurgence of the National Rally and what it means for France: The NR is keen of winning an absolute majority and Marine Le Pen has called for the French electorate to confirm their initial choices and vote her party into power. If the NR is successful, Jordan Bardella, Marine Le Pen's protégé will become Prime Minister and President Macron will be forced into a formal "cohabitation" with a political party that he despises. Mr Bardella is known as Marine Le Pen's "lion cub" as he is entirely devoted to her as is a young 29 years old. One can imagine that any cohabitation with the NR will not be a classical cohabitation between two politicians as the previous three cohabitations with a President form one party and a prime minister from another opposing party. Any future cohabitation will be between the youngest ever president of the fifth Republic and the youngest ever prime minister. Moreover the cohabitation will be in reality a "méanage à trois" as Marine Le Pen, the Lioness in chief will clearly dictate to her protégé what to do, when to roar and when to bite. Although in French literature and cinema, the French ménage à trois is much appreciated, in politics it will be a different matter all together. President Macron, aka "Jupiter" will attempt to follow in President Mitterand's (aka the Sphinx) footsteps and neutralise the RN by forcing them to actually govern and demonstrate potentially their incompetence. One must not forget that the forthcoming events are merely a dress rehearsal for the 2027 presidential elections that Marine Le Pen is obsessively preparing for. Perhaps Jupiter will tame the Lioness in chief and show that her roar is much louder than her bite, but only a fool would take this for granted.

The Anatomy of Brexit The tragedy of the modern-day United Kingdom is hard to fathom from a continental European perspective. What appears to be the most self-damaging political act akin to national suicide, Brexit has proved to be an unmitigated disaster for most observers, except for the hardliners within the UK, who are still pretending that success is "just around the corner" as Britain has regained control of its destiny and is a free nation once again. As if the European Union was some Stalinist straight-jacket that prevented the country from preserving its deserved status of greatness. For a better understanding of the origins of Brexit and the underlying forces that managed to impose such a radical idea on Britain and get away with it by winning a much-contested referendum that was promoted on a foundation of lies, that would make a Donald Trump proud (and which did) for a non-British individual not living in the UK and experiencing it first-hand, it is necessary to turn to a renowned expert and opinion leader in the UK. James O'Brien is one such expert, and his talk show on LBC radio in London is avidly listened to every weekday between 10 am and 1 pm. The format is a phone-in discussion of current affairs and generates robust exchanges with the host. O'Brien is known for his anti-Brexit beliefs and considers himself a "liberal" as opposed to left-wing. O'Brien is not only a radio presenter and podcaster but also a talented author. His latest book, "How They Broke Britain," attempts to explain the present state of the UK. Our economy has tanked, our freedoms are shrinking, and social divisions are growing. Our politicians seem most interested in their own careers, and much of the media only make things worse. We are living in a country almost unrecognisable from the one that existed a decade ago. But whose fault is it really? Who broke Britain and how did they do it? O'Brien firmly places the blame on what he calls "the shady network of influence that has created a broken Britain of strikes, shortages and scandals". Over the course of ten riveting and incisive chapters, he identifies specifically the people and institutions he has in mind; politicians and their unelected advisors, think tanks, journalists and press barons are not spared by his astute mind and fact-based research. The chapters on ex-prime ministers and politicians such as Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, David Cameron and Jeremy Corbyn are riveting. Rishi Sunak, the current Prime Minister, is described in an afterword - much like his tenure at ten Downing Street, which is expected to end very shortly on July the fourth unless, by some miracle, he can avoid defeat at the forthcoming General Election. Other less-known figures for a non-British readership are also singled out, although Rupert Murdoch is world famous not only because he married at the ripe old age of 93. Joe Biden is assuredly envious of Murdoch's continued political influence and stamina. After reading this book, the reader is left with the impression that all is lost and that Britain will never regain its previous standing in the world. The only path to possible redemption and "for the process of repairing Britain to begin" is the election of a new labour Prime Minister in the person of Keir Starmer, thus ending fourteen years of Conservative rule. But even O'Brien is somewhat cautious in his closing remarks. But in the ecosystem where Brexit could happen; where Boris Johnson could achieve the highest office in the land and treat it with complete contempt while his party cheered every lie and scandal; where Liz Truss could crash the economy and later blame it on ‘trans activists’; where a government could abolish our ‘Freedom of Movement’ and tell us to celebrate; where a Home Secretary could call for the confiscation of homeless people’s tents; a Business Secretary can describe meaningless arrangements as lucrative ‘trade deals’ and be applauded by supine client journalists; and where the billionaire-owned media’s weaponisation of immigration continues even as every sector cries out for staff, nothing, but nothing, is certain. In that country, in the Britain they broke, I wouldn’t take anything for granted. One can only hope that the famed resilience and courage of the British people will ultimately prevail and that O'Brien's caution and foreboding are unwarranted. And herein lies the rub. "How They Broke Britain" is a marvellous analysis of the current predicament the country is in. As incisive, intelligent, and informative as the book may be, it does not address the next logical question: what needs to be done in concrete terms to change course? Given the timid and over-cautious declarations of the next presumptive prime minister on the theme of Brexit, where his only guarantee is "to make Brexit work better" establishes upfront a series of redlines that he will not cross (i.e. refusal to either rejoin the EU, the European Economic Area or even the Customs Union) so much so that Starmer has created a political straight jacket of his own that he may live to regret. And with him the United Kingdom as a whole. If this indeed turns out to be the case, can we rely on O'Brien to strongly call him out and advocate for a much more ambitious and pro-European trajectory?