Connect with us

EUROPE

Why Rishi Sunak?

Published

on

Rishi Sunak of the Conservative Party has become the new leader of the UK after the end of Liz Truss’s brief 49-day prime ministerial term. Sunak has become the new prime minister without even needing British citizens’ votes; following the resignation of Boris Johnson, together with Liz Truss, he was one of the new candidates for prime minister but had lost the race to his predecessor.

Brought down by Truss and Sunak, Boris Johnson’s understanding of the economy during and after the Covid crisis was somewhat “heterodox” and “populist”: Contrary to the general downsizing trend in western countries, Johnson had prioritized economic growth and low taxes and declared that he favored measures to pump demand. In fact, Johnson had signaled that he could implement state-led fiscal policies that were not well received by the mainstream.

Boris Johnson took office after the Brexit process, when Britain left the EU, and acted to bring his country back on the world stage as a strong player. When Covid was added to the great recession that plagued capitalist economies, Johnson’s “unstable” actions lead to his downfall. Johnson, who wanted to pursue a looser monetary policy, was thought not to have a coherent and comprehensive economic policy towards the Bank of England’s and the finance’s “orthodox” understanding.

And that’s when Liz Truss became Johnson’s successor. In her debate with Sunak, she also talked about economic growth and the reduction of taxes. She also tried to implement this plan: a $50 billion tax deduction package came into effect to be compensated by borrowing, but the response of the “markets” was harsh. Sterling has declined to unprecedented levels, panicked investors have sold $500 million in assets, and the real estate industry is on the brink. The Bank of England launched an emergency bond-buying program to prevent pension funds from going bankrupt, and the IMF criticized Truss and urged her to reconsider the program.

Perhaps the sign of the resignation came from her ally on the other side of the Atlantic: on October 16, US President Joe Biden called Liz Truss’s tax package a “mistake”. Liz Truss had already begun her U-turn and fired finance minister Kwasi Kwarteng, but it was too late.

Britain’s stalemate

We must accept that Sunak “warned” Truss in a way. During the debate, he said that Truss’s promises of tax cuts, borrowing and economic growth were unrealistic and argued that these policies would not work in an inflationary environment: Raising borrowing to historic and dangerous levels would mean pouring gasoline over the fire.

Speaking to the Financial Times before Truss’s resignation, he said the new prime minister and the new government’s overriding priority was to control inflation. He explains that Truss’ unfunded debts will exacerbate the situation and fuel inflation, and calls out directly to her, “Liz, we have to be honest. Borrowing your way out of inflation isn’t a plan, it’s a fairytale.”

Thus, ex-Goldman Sachs executive and parliament’s richest deputy, Rishi Sunak, emerged as a heartfelt supporter of monetary policies in developed capitalist countries: focusing on fighting inflation, cutting spending, raising interest rates, tight monetary policy. The new prime minister says he supports the Bank of England’s “independence” but promises tax cuts only after inflation is controlled.

But the dilemma persists. Britain went into recession as of October, according to polls published by Financial Times. Interest rate increases and monetary tightening have not been able to reduce inflation fueled by rising energy costs due to the Ukraine-Russia war and sanctions imposed on Russia. Sunak’s plan to cut expenditures seems to trigger the social crisis even more, given the increasing number of people in need of help in society. Besides, when he was the Ministry of Finance between 2020 and 2022, Sunak brought in the highest taxes Britain had seen since the 1950s. Again, even though he preaches “discipline”, Sunak promises higher public expenditures.

There is no jolt in the foreign policy line

Sunak was a supporter of Brexit policy, but there are those in his party who think he has too much sympathy for Brussels. The debate on the Northern Ireland Protocol (NIP) will also be a test for Sunak in this sense. NIP kept Northern Ireland within the EU’s integrated market for goods; it left it loose on its border with the Republic of Ireland and subjected it to additional controls in trade with the rest of Britain. NIP, signed by Boris Johnson in 2020, is criticized by Sunak, but Sunak believes a more conciliatory language is needed, unlike the hardcore Brexiters in his party.

Rishi Sunak, on the other hand, wants to tighten border controls, especially on the issue of immigrants, and to get rid of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) “obstacle.” Arguing that the ECHR was exploited by “lefty ” lawyers and its designation was gradually expanding, he said that the option to leave the ECHR was also on the table. Sunak also supported the plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda.

Stressing the “special relationship” between the United States and Britain in a phone call with Joe Biden, Sunak reiterated his support for Ukraine and said they would stand up to China. In Ukraine, the prospect of Boris Johnson’s return was welcomed, and after Truss’s resignation, the government’s official Twitter account even tweeted about Boris and quickly deleted it, but Sunak’s appointment of the ministries of defense and foreign affairs to Ben Wallace and James Cleverly, who also served in the previous cabinet, was recorded as a gesture that Ukrainian politics would remain unchanged. It was also meaningful that Sunak’s first telephone conversation as prime minister was with Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy. However, Sunak does not support Liz Truss’s and Ben Wallace’s promise to raise defence spending to 3% of GDP. In addition, allies of Johnson’s pushed rumors that during his polemic with Sunak, the new prime minister was less committed to the war than Johnson, and a deal would one day have to be done with Putin.

Internal tensions of the Conservatives and The Talented Mr. Sunak

On the other hand, Sunak is not settled on a solid ground within the party. Boris Johnson’s leadership was the result of contradictions within the Conservative Party (Tories). Most of the Tory MPs in parliament depend on the politics of low taxation and free market sovereignty. But on the other hand, especially representatives from the northern regions of the party demand more government spending, a larger and more interventionist state, and they are very influential within the party.

The Northern Research Group (NRG), an influential team within the party, called on Liz Truss to continue the Tories’ levelling-up policy in the 2019 election manifesto. The NRG is composed of Tories selected from regions traditionally held by the Labour Party and wants more investment in the north.

Johnson chose to manage these contradictions rather than solve them. He was both conservative and pro-free market; he had promised to increase government spending and cut taxes. His speeches in the Brexit campaign included “more prosperity, less Europe”, “more freedom, less regulation”, “more dynamism, less migration.”

Apparently, Rishi Sunak is the answer given in Britain to these contradictions and the current trends of world capitalism. The economy needs to be reorganized under titles such as “green transition” and large investments are required, and the public power needs to increase at a time when private sector investments are in the bottom due to the crisis. The distance between capital groups and the state should be shorter. In addition, the ongoing war in Europe means that the regulatory authority of the state over the society is also extended to wider areas.

All this highlights a figure like Rishi Sunak. He is the member of an Indian family, who were cooperative during the colonial period, ex-Goldman Sachs manager; wealthy; professional and self-educated child of cooperative families of former colonial countries who had migrated to the West in the 1960s and had the opportunity to get into good universities…

EUROPE

Operationsplan Deutschland: The debate over ‘planned economy’ in Germany

Published

on

As Ukraine fires U.S.-made long-range missiles at Russia for the first time and Russian leader Vladimir Putin updates his country’s nuclear doctrine, European countries are preparing for an all-out war on the continent.

According to a 1,000-page document drawn up by the German armed forces called ‘Operationsplan Deutschland’, Germany will host hundreds of thousands of troops from NATO countries and act as a logistics hub to send huge amounts of military equipment, food and medicine to the front line.

The German military is also instructing businesses and civilians on how to protect key infrastructure and mobilize for national defense in the event of Russia expanding drone flights, espionage and sabotage across Europe.

Businesses have been advised to draw up contingency plans detailing the responsibilities of employees in the event of an emergency, and told to stockpile diesel generators or install wind turbines to ensure energy independence.

More state intervention in the economy under discussion

In this context, state intervention in the economy and in companies is being discussed more intensively.

The German state has far-reaching rights in crisis situations. The energy crisis showed how quickly the state can intervene: At the time, the German government filled gas storage facilities by law, nationalized the gas importer Uniper and supplied floating LNG terminals.

According to Bertram Brossardt, CEO of the Bavarian Business Association, even a “transition to a planned economy” could be possible in an emergency.

This ‘planned economy’ could involve the state issuing food vouchers or even forcing people to work in certain sectors, such as water or transport companies.

Companies could also benefit if they have employees who volunteer for disaster relief, the Federal Agency for Technical Relief (THW) or the fire brigade.

Lieutenant Colonel Jörn Plischke, who conducted the company training in Hamburg, said: “It costs you a few days a year to support this. But in a crisis, you have a direct link to the people who protect people and infrastructure,” he said.

Hamburg: The intersection of civil and military economy

Hamburg, where Lieutenant Colonel Plischke attended the event, is a central hub for the transport of goods and troops.

“If our infrastructure is used for military purposes, the risk of cyber-attacks and sabotage increases significantly,” the mayor of the Hanseatic city, Peter Tschentscher, told the Faz newspaper.

The Hamburg Senate has therefore created additional staff to strengthen civil defense. A third ‘home defense corps’ has been introduced, made up of volunteers who do not fight in the troops but work to ensure protection and security.

Exercises are currently being held in the Hanseatic city with the German armed forces and civilian forces.

According to the report, this exercise, called ‘Red Storm Alpha’, is training in the protection of port facilities.

The next exercise, ‘Red Storm Bravo’, will start soon and will be on a larger scale.

The lessons learnt from these exercises will then be incorporated into the ‘Operationsplan Deutschland’. This plan is intended to be a ‘living document’, constantly evolving and adapting to new information and threats.

Continue Reading

EUROPE

The era of the ‘right-wing majority’ in the European Parliament

Published

on

Under Ursula von der Leyen’s second presidency, the European Commission will abandon its previous ‘cordon sanitaire’ policy towards the ‘far right’.

Leyen’s new Commission will include two members from the ‘far right’. Raffaele Fitto of Fratelli d’Italia (Brothers of Italy – FdI), the party of Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, and Olivér Várhelyi, who is close to Fidesz, the party of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.

Fratelli d’Italia is part of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group in the EP, while Fidesz is part of the Patriots for Europe (PfE) group, which also includes the French National Rally (RN) and the Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ).

The conservative European People’s Party (EPP), led by German CSU politician Manfred Weber, has repeatedly cooperated with the ECR in the past legislature and explicitly reserves the right to do so in the future.

The cordon sanitaire against the right is practically non-existent

More recently, it has voted with the PfE and sometimes even with the Europe of Sovereign Nations (ESN), of which the German AfD is a member. The traditional border against the ‘extreme right’ (the so-called ‘security cordon’) is thus continuing to crumble.

The security cordon was systematically relaxed by the EPP in the last legislative period. As early as January 2022, the EPP made it possible for an MEP from the right-wing ECR to be elected as one of the vice-presidents of the EP.

A study by the Greens shows that the European Commission under Ursula von der Leyen has relied on MEPs from the ECR and even the more right-wing ID (Identity and Democracy) group in around 340 votes to secure a majority.

According to the study, these demands often included a reduction in the CO2 price for the car industry or the approval of subsidies for fossil fuels.

With the votes of the EPP, ECR and ID, the EPP also managed to block a motion in April 2024 proposing measures to prevent parliamentary staff from being harassed by MEPs.

So, one small step after another, the security cordon was broken.

Breaking point: European right united against Maduro

In September, one of the first votes of the newly elected EP attracted more attention. The resolution under discussion would have recognised Edmundo González, the defeated candidate in the presidential elections in Venezuela on 28 July 2024, as the real winner of the elections.

The resolution in favour of González was tabled jointly by the EPP and the ECR, in which the party of Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni is the largest group.

The resolution was finally adopted with the votes of Orbán’s Fidez, Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) and PfE, which includes the FPÖ, and the ESN, which includes the AfD.

The ‘Venezuelan majority’ at work in the EP: EPP support for the AfD

The so-called ‘Venezuelan majority’ – the large voting majority of conservative and right-wing parties in the EP – has since come into play on several occasions.

This was the case in October, for example, when the European Parliament decided on the procedure for presenting and voting on future EU commissioners. Also in October, the EPP voted in favour of an AfD budget motion proposing the erection of extensive barriers at the EU’s external borders.

The EPP, ECR and PfE also voted to award this year’s European Parliament Sakharov Prize to González and right-wing Venezuelan opposition politician María Corina Machado.

Finally, last week the EPP joined with other MEPs on the right to amend a bill aimed at halting global deforestation.

Sparking outrage on the left, several rebel MEPs from the ECR, PfE, ESN and the liberal Renew group backed the EPP on key amendments.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen was elected in July on the basis of an alliance between the EPP, Liberals, Socialists and Greens.

In its second term, the European Commission is abandoning its previous ‘cordon sanitaire’ policy against the ‘far right’.

Leyen’s new Commission will include two members from the ‘far right’. Raffaele Fitto of Fratelli d’Italia (Brothers of Italy – FdI), the party of Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, and Olivér Várhelyi, who is close to Fidesz, the party of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.

Fratelli d’Italia is part of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group in the EP, while Fidesz is part of the Patriots for Europe (PfE) group, which also includes the French National Rally (RN) and the Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ).

The conservative European People’s Party (EPP), led by German CSU politician Manfred Weber, has repeatedly cooperated with the ECR in the past legislature and explicitly reserves the right to do so in the future.

New Commissioners from the right

Raffaele Fitto, a member of Giorgia Meloni’s FdI party, is known as one of Meloni’s closest friends and will be appointed by Leyen as one of the vice-presidents of the EU Commission ‘responsible for cohesion and reforms’.

Hungary, on the other hand, has appointed former Enlargement Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi as a commissioner in Brussels, with future responsibility for health. Várhelyi is very close to Prime Minister Orbán’s Fidesz party.

There is strong protest against Fitto and Várhelyi in the Socialist and Green parliamentary groups, which support the Leyen Commission. It is rumoured that both groups will not support the appointment of the two politicians.

The invisible architect of the right-wing alliance: Manfred Weber of the CSU

The row over future commissioners has come to a head in recent days.

EPP President Manfred Weber (CSU), who is seen as the main architect of his group’s alliance with the ECR and the EPP, could theoretically get two right-wing commissioners approved with a “Venezuelan majority”.

However, if CDU or CSU politicians in the EP vote with the AfD on a key decision, this could be seen as an unwelcome signal shortly before the early German elections.

But as former Italian prime ministers Romano Prodi and Mario Monti said on Tuesday, pressure is growing for the EU to act ‘as one’ at a time when it faces ‘major challenges both in the East and in the West’.

We have a responsibility to make sure that something changes after this election… The majority will very often include the ECR,” German EPP MEP Peter Liese of the CSU also told reporters on Monday.

Liese said he had no “firewall” against the ECR and claimed that Fitto’s senior position had been negotiated as part of an agreement between the main political families in the European Council at the beginning of the summer.

Continued support for Ukraine in return for right-wing MEPs

On Wednesday (20 November), however, the leaders of the European Parliament’s political groups, meeting in Brussels, reached an agreement.

According to this, Fitto and Várhelyi will be allowed to take up the positions in the European Commission that Leyen has envisaged for them, and the Socialists will agree to this.

In return, the EPP promises to cooperate only with ‘pro-Ukrainian’ parties that support the EU and the rule of law.

This means that the old ‘cordon sanitaire’, i.e. the border against the ‘extreme right’, has been replaced primarily by foreign policy conditions.

According to the EPP’s interpretation, there are no longer any obstacles to cooperation with the ECR.

Continue Reading

EUROPE

Turmoil in the SPD: Pistorius vs. Scholz

Published

on

Pressure is mounting on German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to relinquish leadership of his party, the Social Democrats (SPD), ahead of the upcoming snap elections. This move is seen as a potential lifeline for the party, currently polling in third place, to regain electoral momentum.

The SPD leadership has thus far supported Scholz’s bid for a second term in the federal elections, now rescheduled for 23 February 2025 following the collapse of the three-party coalition on 6 November. However, internal dissent is growing.

In two heated party meetings last week, SPD MPs deliberated over whether Defence Minister Boris Pistorius should replace Scholz as the party’s candidate. According to Der Spiegel and POLITICO, one meeting included the conservative wing of the SPD, while the other involved its left wing. Both groups reportedly had significant support for replacing Scholz with Pistorius.

Calls for Scholz to step aside reached a crescendo on Monday, with prominent SPD politicians from North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany’s most populous state, leading the charge.

Pistorius’ voices rise within the party

Dirk Wiese and Wiebke Esdar stated: “The focus is on finding the best political line-up for this election. We hear a lot of praise for Boris Pistorius. It is clear that the final decision on the chancellor candidacy will rest with the party committees, as it should.”

Markus Töns, a long-time SPD member, echoed this sentiment in Stern: “The chancellor has done a good job in difficult circumstances, but the coalition’s end signals a need for a fresh start. Boris Pistorius would make this easier than Olaf Scholz.”

Former SPD leader Sigmar Gabriel was even more critical. Writing on X (formerly Twitter), Gabriel warned of “growing resistance” within the SPD to Scholz’s leadership. “The SPD leadership’s only response is appeasement and loyalty pledges. What we need is bold political leadership. Without it, the SPD risks falling below 15 percent,” he cautioned.

Scholz confident of ‘support from the leadership’

The SPD leadership had planned to finalize the chancellor candidacy decision at its party conference on 30 November. However, the timeline may accelerate to quell the escalating debate.

Speaking from the G20 Summit in Brazil, Scholz dismissed questions about his candidacy, expressing confidence in party support. “The SPD and I aim to win this election together,” he told Die Welt. Secretary-General Lars Klingbeil reinforced this stance, stating on ARD television: “We are committed to continuing with Olaf Scholz—there’s no wavering.”

Chancellor returns without stopping in Mexico

Despite these reassurances, Scholz abruptly canceled his planned trip to Mexico, returning to Berlin after the G20 Summit amid rumors of party infighting. While the SPD leadership held a conference call on Tuesday to discuss the campaign strategy, no decisions were reached.

Recent opinion polls paint a bleak picture for both Scholz and the SPD. The party is polling at 16 percent, far behind the CDU and the far-right AfD, marking a steep decline of 10 points since the 2021 elections.

Yet, Boris Pistorius remains Germany’s most popular politician, consistently outpacing CDU leader Friedrich Merz in approval ratings. This has fueled hopes within the SPD that Pistorius could revitalize their electoral prospects.

Pistorius’ rising profile is not without controversy. Known for his hawkish stance on military issues, he advocates for making the German military “fit for war” and has pushed for increased defense spending to meet NATO’s 2 percent of GDP target. Critics argue that these positions clash with the SPD’s traditional skepticism toward military intervention and ties with Moscow.

Nonetheless, many within the SPD believe Pistorius offers the best chance to avoid a crushing defeat in February’s elections. Pistorius has championed investments to rebuild the Bundeswehr after decades of neglect and launched initiatives to recruit for Germany’s depleted armed forces. His restructuring of the army earlier this year emphasized regional defense over external missions.

Internationally, Pistorius’ assertive approach has earned respect from Western allies, positioning him as a strong contender for the chancellorship despite his public denials. “We already have a candidate, and he is the sitting chancellor,” Pistorius recently told German state television.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey