{"id":47023,"date":"2021-09-21T10:47:11","date_gmt":"2021-09-21T10:47:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-47\/"},"modified":"2021-09-22T07:53:48","modified_gmt":"2021-09-22T07:53:48","slug":"diari-de-les-idees-47","status":"publish","type":"newspaper","link":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-47\/","title":{"rendered":"Diari de les idees 47"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

We resume to work after the summer holidays with this new edition of the Diari de les idees<\/em>, which could not but highlight as one of its main topics the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, which coincided with the commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the attacks on the Twin Towers in New York. This fact is particularly relevant given that it not only represents the defeat of armed forces that are far superior in terms of men, equipment and technology, but also shakes the idea proclaimed by some theoreticians and think tanks that democracy can be “exported” unilaterally through military intervention. The withdrawal of the US and its allies is therefore a recognition that investing huge amounts of money and technology in parallel to military interventions does not necessarily produce the desired results, in either scale or time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Indeed, recent history shows that democratic transitions are more likely to succeed when local politicians and societies lead the cause. At best, external support for democratic transitions has played a secondary role. In many other scenarios, however, foreign intervention, rather than accelerating the arrival of democracy, slows it down or jeopardizes it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The case of Afghanistan shows that two decades of multinational military intervention, widespread political support from the international community, hundreds of thousands of dead and the huge amounts of money invested are not enough to strengthen democracy. In the last twenty years, the US government has allocated 145 billion dollars for “reconstruction” projects. This budget does not include, among other things, the costs of war. A study<\/a> by Brown University has established that between 2001 and 2021, the US government will spend a total of 2.2 trillion dollars in Afghanistan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It would be a mistake if countries aiming to defend democracy abandon their efforts to protect and strengthen the fragile democracies that are currently trying to consolidate themselves. What is important is to determine precisely in what areas and in what manner to provide foreign assistance if it is to be effective. For if, one thing is certain, it is that the way in which the United States and its allies have attempted to promote democracy in Afghanistan through a military campaign and an externally imposed state-building process has failed.In this respect, Paul Thomson<\/a> points to some aspects of Samuel Huntington’s theories and considers that, given the circumstances, a re-reading of the American political scientist offers some useful keys to shed more light on the situation. According to the author of controversial Clash of Civilisations<\/em> (Simon & Schuster: 1996), if on the one hand the West cannot remain passive towards those who threaten its legitimate interests, it is neither intellectually honest nor geopolitically judicious to defend them with moralising discourses. 25 years ago Huntington already denounced the West lived with the profound conviction that it held the keys to what is true and what is fair. So much so that the West considered it was enough for its own dogmas to move for the Truth to be transferred identically and immediately to all humanity. Moreover, the answer, now reinforced by the American defeat in Afghanistan, is that this is not so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One of the side effects of the US withdrawal is the threat posed by terrorist groups. Olivier Roy argues in El Pa\u00eds<\/em><\/a> that with the return to power of the Taliban the real danger is not Al-Qaeda, but ISIS. The ISIS groups in Afghanistan, which have a strong presence in the eastern provinces of the country, have their origins in a split from the Taliban: they opposed negotiations with the Americans and the Taliban’s refusal to join the international jihad. Indeed, it is crucial for ISIS to show that there is no alternative to global jihad and that not only Afghanistan but also Mali and Syria are at stake. In Mali, a violent conflict is developing between the local branch of Al-Qaeda (AQIM) and ISIS: of course, AQIM is not (yet) negotiating with the French, but there is a suspicion of covert negotiations with the various Malian political forces (including the army).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Likewise, in Le Monde Diplomatique,<\/em> Philippe Leymarie insists that for armed jihadist groups in the Sahel, the West’s collapse in Afghanistan is proof that victory is possible and even close. With the hasty and chaotic withdrawal of US and allied troops from Afghanistan comes a new momentum that could benefit armed groups. In this context, the parallels between the two situations are obvious. A few guerrillas very well integrated into the population, and resorting to terrorist techniques, challenge European soldiers and local armies under foreign tutelage, over-equipped, but poorly motivated and weighed down by corruption. The jihadists try to establish emirates, decree religious laws (sharia), expel foreigners. Recent events reveal a double defeat, of the American and Western side in Afghanistan, of the French side in the Sahel. Economic interventionism, even in the form of supposedly non-profit development projects, can become destabilising for these countries with weak states, lacking frames of reference, where public services have deserted the most remote regions, such as border areas. This leads to an increased risk of corruption, the multiplication of side effects, the marginalisation of local communities, etc. In both cases, there is a risk to a greater destabilisation of the country’s economy. Finally, the more westernised, often favoured, social strata oppose the people who find it difficult to access jobs, public services, education and who end up being an inexhaustible source of recruitment for terrorist groups. <\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, we highlight the dossier Foreign Affairs<\/em><\/a> <\/em>dedicates to the US withdrawal from Afghanistan as part of the commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the attacks of 11 September 2001. At the time, George W. Bush set out to launch a war whose immediate target was Al-Qaeda, the jihadist group responsible for the attacks on the Twin Towers, but it was not entirely clear that the Americans fully understood the true dimensions of this war. Indeed, the massive mobilisation of military resources that followed involved ground invasions and drone strikes abroad, a review and strengthening of surveillance and security systems in the US, and the search for allies and partners around the world. Almost overnight, US foreign policy changed forever. Foreign Affairs<\/em> examines the policy debates surrounding the so-called “war on terror” as the scope of the conflict expanded, the terrorist threat evolved, and enthusiasm for America’s endless wars waned. Ultimately, twenty years later, the campaign to combat terrorism has changed both how the United States sees itself and how it is perceived by the rest of the world. The war that has consumed the United States – and much of the world – for two decades may simply be entering a new phase…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In terms of Catalan politics, the celebration of the first Diada<\/em> after the pardons and the run-up to the meeting of the Negotiating Table with the State stand out. Odei A. Etxearte points out in Vilaweb<\/em><\/a> that the main weakness of the Catalan side is the lack of effective mechanisms to put pressure on Spanish PM Pedro S\u00e1nchez. Indeed, the only tool that the government of Catalan president Pere Aragon\u00e8s has to try to get S\u00e1nchez to give in on something is arithmetic in the Spanish Congress. In addition, in the short term, the negotiation of the budget, whose approval S\u00e1nchez needs in order to complete the legislature, but which he will obviously not pay the price of an agreed referendum in Catalonia. A referendum that has never entered into any of the political coordinates of the Spanish state, which it has always rejected outright. This is why the mobilisation of the Diada<\/em> can be interpreted as reinforcing the Catalan government’s position at the table. This is the first paradox. The pressure that the demonstration adds to the table is the indirect threat of a return to the unilateral path. The second paradox is that the demobilisation of the pro-independence movement on the streets until the Diada<\/em> is explained in part (and beyond the pandemic) by the actions of the parties. Now precisely these very same parties most need to show their strength in the streets to reinforce their negotiating position because, in order to put pressure on Madrid, the tools of daily political praxis and electoral support are not enough, even if the pro-independence movement surpassed the 50% threshold on the 14 February elections. Finally, the third paradox is that a possible return to the unilateral path, in order to gain internal legitimacy within the movement, would need the failure of the dialogue table to justify itself. Because, despite the apparently hegemonic political narrative, and although the experience of 2017 and the repression that followed signalled its limits, it has not been discredited as a possibility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Spanish politics is still marked by the regime and institutional crisis that has been accelerated by the drip-drip of news that allegedly implicates the emeritus king in corruption cases. Ant\u00f3n Losada argues in El Diario<\/em><\/a> that because of the royal scandals, the Treasury, the Public Prosecutor’s Office, the judiciary, the legislature and the executive, in other words, all the institutions of the State have had to take decisions that are difficult to defend, but are compromised by the responsibility to preserve the institutional system. No firewall can withstand such a pressure. First the abdication, then the exile, the string of tax regularisations and now the investigation for four crimes – money laundering, bribery, influence peddling and tax crimes, which can lead to up to 16 years in prison. What will the next step be? The answer is that, if the prosecution formalises its charges, the result could be a prison sentence. If it files them, it will be easy to feed the theory of a cover-up.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this context, and as pointed out by Ignacio S\u00e1nchez-Cuenca in El Pa\u00eds<\/em><\/a> the elites of the Transition could have been willing to reflect on what went wrong and try to perfect the system they helped to create. They could have acknowledged that the two-party system was failing, that the state was losing its capacity to deal with problems that it was necessary to think of integrative solutions to the Catalan problem. But instead, a very significant part of these elites have preferred to close themselves off, without recognising that after a political and economic clash such as the one that has taken place, it is inevitable to reflect on what has happened and to think about reforms and changes that would prevent such a thing from happening again. At best, they have attributed the problems of the present to the liberality of the constitutional period. These political, economic and media elites have experienced it as a personal offence and almost as a humiliation that political forces have emerged that are willing to question the Transition and that in Catalonia a significant part of society has lost interest in remaining part of Spain. Instead of asking themselves why it has come to this point, they have preferred to delegitimise any debate on transformations and improvements to the system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the European level, Simon Tisdall discusses in an article puiblished in The Guardian<\/em><\/a> the legacy of German chancellor, who is now on the verge of stepping down, and considers that while on the one hand she has served her country’s interests well, on the other hand she lacked a strategic vision for the EU. As the world burns, Germany slumbers. Whether the challenge is an accelerating climate crisis, crumbling EU unity, China\u2019s abusive authoritarianism, a collapsing US security umbrella or bottomless Russian malevolence, Europe\u2019s most powerful country too often fails to take a stand. Emmanuel Macron\u2019s France strikes out randomly. Boris Johnson\u2019s Britain claims, delusionally, to \u201cpunch above its weight\u201d. Berlin, in contrast, fights shy. Ultimately, Tisdall wonders who will speak for Europe in a world run ragged by conflict, populism, pandemic and poverty. Certainly not Brussels bureaucracy. Britain has thrown itself under a geopolitical bus. France lacks the strength. In addition, strategically underperforming Germany is asleep at the wheel. Unless and until Berlin awakes, the encircling enemies of democracy will continue to thrive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a related vein, Gilles Gressani interviews in Le Grand Continent<\/em><\/a> European Council President Charles Michel who discusses internal geopolitical dynamics, the lessons of Afghanistan and the essential elements for articulating a common European narrative between China and the United States. With respect to Afghanistan, Michel believes that Europeans must now consider how they can have more influence in the future and how they can act to influence the course of events in a direction that is compatible with their interests. In this respect, Michel regrets that democratic political engagement always focuses on the next elections and argues that we need to be able to reflect on the impact of decisions, not for the next elections, but for the next generation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the dangers that threaten democracy, Jan-Werner M\u00fcller argues in The New Statesman<\/em><\/a> that for some years now Brexit and Trump have symbolised the rise of right-wing populism and the profound unease of liberal democracies. However, a curious fact is rarely mentioned: in 2016 the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and the Remain camp had slogans very similar to those of their opponents, but which did not have enough resonance to appeal to large segments of the electorate: “Stronger Together” and “Stronger in Europe”. M\u00fcller believes that this helps to understand the fault lines in politics today. While the importance of cultural divisions and the growing alienation of the population from liberal elites is commonly pointed out, this means uncritically adopting a cultural framing of political conflict that too often ends up giving ammunition to the right, if not the far right. In his view, the divisions that threaten democracies have an increasingly strong economic basis insofar as the rhetorical strategies of a right wing committed to plutocratic populism shadowed the general improvement of development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the economic sphere, Adam Tooze says in The Guardian<\/em><\/a> that 2020 revealed as never before the risks and weaknesses of the market-driven global system. In this respect, it is hard to avoid the feeling we have reached a turning point, even though if when the pandemic began, globalisation was already being heavily challenged. A series of deep crises, starting in Asia in the late 1990s and moving to the Atlantic financial system in 2008, to the Eurozone in 2010 and to global commodity producers in 2014, had already dented confidence in the market economy. All these crises have been overcome, but at the cost of huge expenditures by governments and central banks. In this context, it is clear that there have been worse pandemics in the past, but what stands out most about COVID-19 has been the scale of the response. Not only rich countries have invested huge amounts to support citizens and businesses; poor and middle-income countries have also been willing to pay a huge price. The coronavirus has clearly exposed our institutional unpreparedness, our “organised irresponsibility”. In short, the Anthropocene has shown its teeth, albeit on a still modest scale, and we must be prepared for what is yet to come.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The fight against climate change has once again taken centre stage with the publication of the new r<\/a>eport of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The report presents devastating conclusions on the effects of climate change. There is no doubt that global warming is due to human activity that has led to rapid and widespread changes in the atmosphere, oceans, biosphere and cryosphere. The scale of recent changes in the entire climate system and the current state of many aspects of the climate system are unprecedented over a period spanning thousands of years. During the last three millennia, sea levels have never risen as rapidly as they have since 1900. Since the IPCC’s first report in 1990, 1.1 billion tonnes of CO2 have been emitted, representing half of the emissions since the beginning of the industrial era. Recent climate change is widespread, rapid and intensifying. The temperature over the last 10 years has been 1.1\u00b0C higher compared to the years 1850-1900. Under all emissions scenarios (except the lowest), we will exceed the global warming threshold of + 1.5\u00b0C in the near future (between 2021 and 2040) and remain below + 1.5\u00b0C until the end of the century. As warming continues, each region could experience more extreme weather events, in different ways, sometimes in combination and with multiple consequences. This is more likely to happen with warming of +2\u00b0C than 1.5\u00b0C (and even more so with additional levels of warming). Unlikely events, such as melting ice caps, abrupt changes in ocean currents, cumulative extremes and warming significantly above the estimated warming range, cannot be excluded. Ultimately, limiting global warming will require strong, rapid and sustainable action to reduce emissions of CO2 and methane, as well as other greenhouse gases. This would not only reduce the consequences of climate change, but also improve air quality. Limiting global warming to + 1.5\u00b0C will no longer be possible without an immediate and large-scale fall in greenhouse gas emissions. If we achieve carbon neutrality, global warming would have to stop. Many changes due to greenhouse gas will be irreversible for centuries, if not millennia, including changes in oceans, ice caps and global sea levels. However, we can slow some changes and halt some others by limiting global warming. A 42 pages summary<\/a>  aimed at political actors and the public is available<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, in the field of sciences and new technologies, Nick Reid points out in Politico<\/em><\/a> that as the pandemic recedes and we return to our routines, we must avoid falling back into old habits. We have a unique opportunity to build a better society, to realign our economies and our societies. Europe’s commitments to the green and digital transitions are certainly important, especially with the EUR 672.5 billion Resilience and Recovery Facility. However, public expenditure alone will not be enough. These actions need to be accompanied by a change of mindset, forged during the pandemic, combining new collaborative tools with strong political determination. The challenge is as important for the digital transition as it is for the green transition. For Europe, the reality is that the last decade has been one of relative decline in digital leadership, a downward trajectory that could threaten future prosperity, employment and competitiveness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Andrew C. Heinrich and Saad B. Omer argue in a very critical article published in Foreign Affairs<\/em><\/a> that even if there has been an unprecedented cooperation to fight the COVID-19 pandemic, this has been far from adequate to the challenge. The international community has not responded with the necessary speed or forcefulness, and this highlights the work still to be done to establish a truly cooperative multilateral health system. Indeed, it has become clear that the world needs a permanent institution, built specifically to counter future outbreaks. This global fund should have the resources, flexibility and support to rapidly distribute aid, facilitate cutting-edge research and accelerate the manufacture of vaccines and drugs. Without such action, the international community will be unprepared for the next, potentially more devastating pandemic. In this regard, international cooperation has fallen short on several key issues. While multilateral efforts focused on vaccine development have been highly successful, the billions of dollars invested in vaccine research did not match similar efforts to develop innovative diagnostic tools, therapeutics and preventive measures. Even the most successful instrument, the COVAX scheme, is still grossly underfunded. In April this year the UN estimated it needed at least $2 billion in additional funding to reach its goal of delivering two billion doses of vaccine by the end of the year. Currently, COVAX has only distributed approximately ten percent.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

We resume to work after the summer holidays with this new edition of the Diari de les idees, which could not but highlight as one of its main topics the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, which coincided with the commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the attacks on the Twin Towers in New York. This fact is particularly relevant given that it not only represents the defeat of armed forces that are far superior in terms of men, equipment and technology, but also shakes the idea proclaimed by some theoreticians and think tanks that democracy can be “exported” unilaterally through military\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":46812,"template":"","category_newspaper":[320],"segment":[],"subject":[],"class_list":["post-47023","newspaper","type-newspaper","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category_newspaper-320"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nDiari de les idees 47 – IDEES<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-47\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Diari de les idees 47 – IDEES\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"We resume to work after the summer holidays with this new edition of the Diari de les idees, which could not but highlight as one of its main topics the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, which coincided with the commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the attacks on the Twin Towers in New York. This fact is particularly relevant given that it not only represents the defeat of armed forces that are far superior in terms of men, equipment and technology, but also shakes the idea proclaimed by some theoreticians and think tanks that democracy can be “exported” unilaterally through military\u2026\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-47\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"IDEES\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-09-22T07:53:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/afgan2.jpg?fit=890%2C709&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"890\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"709\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-47\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-47\\\/\",\"name\":\"Diari de les idees 47 – IDEES\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-47\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-47\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/09\\\/afgan2.jpg?fit=890%2C709&ssl=1\",\"datePublished\":\"2021-09-21T10:47:11+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-09-22T07:53:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-47\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-47\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-47\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/09\\\/afgan2.jpg?fit=890%2C709&ssl=1\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2021\\\/09\\\/afgan2.jpg?fit=890%2C709&ssl=1\",\"width\":890,\"height\":709},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-47\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Inici\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Diari de les idees\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Diari de les idees 47\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/\",\"name\":\"IDEES\",\"description\":\"Contemporary global issues\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Diari de les idees 47 – IDEES","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-47\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Diari de les idees 47 – IDEES","og_description":"We resume to work after the summer holidays with this new edition of the Diari de les idees, which could not but highlight as one of its main topics the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, which coincided with the commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the attacks on the Twin Towers in New York. This fact is particularly relevant given that it not only represents the defeat of armed forces that are far superior in terms of men, equipment and technology, but also shakes the idea proclaimed by some theoreticians and think tanks that democracy can be “exported” unilaterally through military\u2026","og_url":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-47\/","og_site_name":"IDEES","article_modified_time":"2021-09-22T07:53:48+00:00","og_image":[{"width":890,"height":709,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/afgan2.jpg?fit=890%2C709&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-47\/","url":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-47\/","name":"Diari de les idees 47 – IDEES","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-47\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-47\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/afgan2.jpg?fit=890%2C709&ssl=1","datePublished":"2021-09-21T10:47:11+00:00","dateModified":"2021-09-22T07:53:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-47\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-47\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-47\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/afgan2.jpg?fit=890%2C709&ssl=1","contentUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/afgan2.jpg?fit=890%2C709&ssl=1","width":890,"height":709},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-47\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Inici","item":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Diari de les idees","item":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Diari de les idees 47"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/#website","url":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/","name":"IDEES","description":"Contemporary global issues","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/newspaper\/47023","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/newspaper"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/newspaper"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/newspaper\/47023\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":47026,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/newspaper\/47023\/revisions\/47026"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/46812"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=47023"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category_newspaper","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/category_newspaper?post=47023"},{"taxonomy":"segment","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/segment?post=47023"},{"taxonomy":"subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/subject?post=47023"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}