A fact-based, non-ideological blog on global issues



International politics can be sometimes frustrating to follow: negotiations appear to move slowly in the face of calls for urgent action; regional conflicts develop in ways that run counter to our expectations; apparently simple solutions to major problems appear to be systematically ignored by world leaders, who seem to prefer to ignore problems rather than make decisions.

If you feel frustrated by such a state of affairs, you are not alone. World powers can make bad decisions because they have a bad understanding of facts on the ground. But more often, those “bad” decisions might be logical responses, which we don’t understand because we are not aware of the decision making processes that bring world leaders to reach such decisions. The decision taken might be “bad” to our uninformed eyes, but be perfectly understandable if we look at things from their perspective, and have a clear understanding of all the facts they are taking into account.

Of course, many international policy decisions are taken by people who have strong egos, choose to ignore some of the facts and put their personal priorities above the best interests of their country. Some politicians appear to take positions based entirely on their assessment of how many votes these will bring them at the next election. I am not naming anybody, and you can feel free to think of anyone of your political foes whom you think meets that definition.

But such cynical behaviour is far from generalised. Most politicians have a vision of what they intend to achieve (even the ones you disagree with, believe it or not), and the most successful ones base their decisions on pragmatic balancing of their political priorities and their reelection chances.

Towards a fact-based analysis of global issues

To better understand how decisions are taken and get a better idea of where events might be taking us, it is important to be aware of a variety of events and situations which are often overlooked in general media reports. Journalistic omissions are usually intended to simplify media reports and make them more readable and immediately understandable, but they often have the unintended consequence of depriving the reader of information that is essential for a correct understanding of what exactly is going on. Sometimes such errors of omissions can be deliberate: in order to manipulate public opinion, it is seldom necessary to lie, since carefully selecting which facts to report and which ones to omit is usually enough to provide a very slanted version of events.

This blog will attempt to highlight less reported international policy developments, to help form a better “global picture” of the reality in which important decisions are taken. It will seek to analyse global issues from the point of view of reason, and based as much as possible on objective observations of the reality in which we live. It will look at major international processes such as the negotiations on global warming, referring as much as possible to “facts on the ground”, and measuring how world leaders and their diplomats respond to them. It will also try to provide clear assessments of major international disputes - from the West’s relations with China to Russia’s geopolitical moves - measuring observed developments on the ground level against the claims, statements and/or decisions taken by our leaders.

My hope is to remain as non-ideological as possible - providing as much as possible a politically neutral view of events. Nonetheless, I will not shy away from taking clear positions on what I see as incontrovertible facts, irrespective of whether these “facts” are seen as supporting a particular political perspective. An example of what I am talking about is global warming, where public opinion is sharply divided into very well defined camps, and any statement is generally immediately construed as “taking sides” one way or another.

I realise this goal of maintaining neutrality is a very ambitious one. One tool that this blog will use to reduce the risk of being slanted is to invite other writers to provide their own reports on what they perceive as insufficiently reported facts that the public should be aware of. The hope is that this will help broaden perspectives, and encourage a constructive dialogue over the most controversial global themes. The only thing that I will ask any contributors to this blog is to stick as much as possible to rational, fact-based analysis.

About myself

I was born in Italy but have always lived an international life - my first journey to my mother’s homeland, the UK, occurred when I was one year old. I have over 30 years experience of working in Brussels for a think-tank devoted to EU and international politics, with a focus on energy, climate and technology. I am now semi-retired, and currently live in sunny California. I consider that a good knowledge of technical and scientific realities is very important to properly analyse many of the current international political trends, and determine possible future developments.

Santa Monica, 5 December 2021

Giacomo Valentini

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How times change - The Left’s change of attitude towards NATO

  The Year was 1983 The town was Sigonella, Sicily, Italy. Protests erupted against the deployment of cruise missiles in NATO bases across Europe. I vividly remember the demonstrations, even participating in some. The prevailing sentiment was a fear of being dragged into a conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union. A Different Worldview The United States represented capitalism, while the Soviet Union embodied communism. For many Europeans, the choice between these systems wasn't clear-cut. Germany passed legislation effectively banning the Communist Party. In Italy, a strong anticommunist elite took various legal and less-than-legal steps to prevent the Communist Party ever entering government. Other European countries experienced similar trends. As a result, for millions of Europe, NATO was thus seen as an instrument of oppression, of stifling democratic processes. In this climate, a significant portion of Europe's left-wing held a favorable or neutral view of th...
Read more

Considerations on Russia, Ukraine and Certain Left-Wing Thinking

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a watershed moment in European history. It is a clear attempt to rebuild walls and iron curtains across Europe, reversing the momentous changes that took place in 1991 when the Soviet Union collapsed. That was an epoch-changing event, which ended a 40-year long Cold War between a democratic and capitalist West (Western Europe plus the USA, Canada and Japan) and a Communist world which included dozens of countries on several continents, under the ideological and military leadership of the Soviet Union. When the Soviet Union collapsed, communist parties all over the world were left in a state of crisis. Communist regimes collapsed, and in democratic countries, Communist parties had to adapt to the new reality, most of the time disbanding, joining other political movements, or mutating into broader-based progressive political formations. The few that survived have mostly stayed as small, marginal movements largely isolated from the mainstream left. More bro...
Read more

The Russian-Ukraine Conflict as a Failure of Deterrence

  Abstract : This article analyses the potential factors contributing to the start of the Ukraine conflict, by applying the teachings of eminent international affairs scholar John Mearsheimer. It argues that Europe and America failed to send adequate deterrence signals, which played a crucial role in the escalation. While Mearsheimer's analysis that the West helped trigger the conflict is largely correct, it is not for the reasons he has provided. The ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine has been analysed through various lenses, with deterrence theory offering a particularly insightful perspective. John Mearsheimer, a prominent scholar in international relations, has extensively explored the concept of deterrence, emphasising the critical importance of sending clear signals to potential aggressors. The essence of deterrence, according to Mearsheimer, lies in demonstrating sufficient military capability and resolve to convince a rival that any act of aggression would be too c...
Read more