{"id":57343,"date":"2022-05-19T06:34:47","date_gmt":"2022-05-19T06:34:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-61\/"},"modified":"2022-05-25T12:01:49","modified_gmt":"2022-05-25T12:01:49","slug":"diari-de-les-idees-61","status":"publish","type":"newspaper","link":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-61\/","title":{"rendered":"Diari de les idees 61"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

This new edition of Diari de les Idees <\/em>is released in a moment marked by the substantial change in Europe’s geopolitical structure due to the applications for NATO membership submitted by Finland and Sweden, thus putting an end to their traditional policy of neutrality. The war in Ukraine also allows us to reflect on the danger of escalation of the conflict and the use of concepts such as the Cold War and the “free world” that we all thought were outdated. On the other hand, we also devote our attention to a European policy that is also subject to the impacts of the conflict that is developing on its borders. We analyse as well the causes of the current generalised increase in inflation, the importance of state policies regarding the energy transition and the increase in cyber-surveillance tools in the world of work. We do not leave aside the repercussions of Catalangate, which the Minister for Foreign Action and Open Government of the Generalitat de Catalunya, Vict\u00f2ria Alsina, analyses in an article published in the newspaper Le Monde<\/em>, where she stresses that Spain is the right place to begin to solve the problem of spyware, given the magnitude of the Catalan case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Starting with international politics, we highlight an interview published in The F<\/em>inancial Times<\/em><\/a> where Henry Kissinger argues that the global geopolitical situation will undergo significant changes after the war in Ukraine. He considers that Russia will at least have to reassess its relationship with Europe and its general attitude towards NATO. At the same time, he says that it is not wise to adopt a policy of frontal opposition to two adversaries \u2013referring to Russia and China\u2013 as this will only bring them closer together. On the other hand, Kissinger stresses that we now have technologies where the speed of exchange and the subtlety of inventions can produce catastrophic effects that were not even imaginable a few years ago. We are living in an entirely new era where, as technology spreads around the world, diplomacy and warfare will need a different content. As for the Ukrainian war, he argues that Putin miscalculated the situation he faced internationally and, obviously, Russia’s capability to handle such a major undertaking. When the time comes for a settlement, the previous relationship will not exist but a new kind of arrangement that will come about not because the West demands it but because Russia will have learned from its mistakes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For his part, Ido Vock argues in The New Statesman<\/em><\/a> <\/em> that Putin’s war in Ukraine has brought about the most significant security restructuring in northern Europe in decades. Indeed, Finland and Sweden’s NATO membership would mean a doubling of Russia’s land border with NATO, which is currently about 1,215 kilometres, since Finland’s border with Russia is 1,340 kilometres long. Therefore, the expansion of NATO’s border with Russia might increase the chances of accidental or intentional escalation between the two actors. At the same time, Finnish airspace and military capability would help repel a hypothetical Russian attack in the three Baltic States, which would be the most likely targets of a possible Moscow attack, thus strengthening the Alliance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Regarding the paradigm shift due to Finland and Sweden’s applications to join the Atlantic Alliance, Manuel Manonelles tells in El Nacional<\/em><\/a> <\/u><\/em> that this represents a radical change of scenario in European geopolitics and that in order to understand its depth, it is necessary to take into account the dimension of such a substantial change for these two countries, as well as the enormous challenges that the decision to abandon their historical policy of neutrality might entail for them. Manonelles also discusses how Putin will deal with this new defeat and points out that it is difficult to foresee. Firstly, because he has little room for manoeuvre and secondly, because the military situation in Ukraine is already complicated enough for Russia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, Turkey’s position opposes in principle the Scandinavian countries’ accession. In statements to Euractiv<\/em><\/a>,<\/strong> Erdogan stated that it was already a mistake for NATO to accept Greece as a member and that Turkey does not want to repeat similar mistakes. Moreover, he considers Scandinavian countries to be a haven for terrorist organisations (alluding to Kurdish refugees). Meanwhile, Anne-Marie Slaughter warns in The Financial Times<\/em><\/a> <\/u><\/em> that the accession of Finland and Sweden may contribute to deepen the rift between East and West and believes that NATO’s immediate goal should be to help Ukrainian forces push Putin back to his initial positions in the east of the country and force him to engage in serious peace negotiations. However, we must be aware that Putin will never go to the negotiating table just to accept a defeat, while turning Russia into a kind of North Korea through sanctions would only bring it closer to China and make it a permanent danger to European and global security. The real question then has to be how to achieve the best outcome for all of Europe, because Russia is part of this continent and Europe will never be truly peaceful if it does not integrate the nations of Eastern Europe, including Russia, into its economic and security structures. This will not happen with Putin in office, nor perhaps with his immediate successors. Nevertheless, in the medium to long term, the Russians, Ukrainians, Moldovans, Georgians, Belarussians and so many others cannot be condemned to another century of exclusion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Also, Peter Slezkine argues in Foreign Affairs<\/em><\/a> that it is a bad idea to revive the Cold War and ‘free world’ concepts that are being reused after the invasion of Ukraine, as it may have consequences that transcend the field of mere rhetoric inasmuch as the inability of the US to formulate a positive ideology to unite the free world during the Cold War was a systemic problem. In its current form, it seems that the concept of the “free world” overlaps with the idea of the West. At the same time, the war in Ukraine has revealed a persistent gap between Western unity and Western universalism. Outside of the United States’ formal (mainly Western) allies, attitudes towards sanctions against Russia have been largely ambivalent. This is hardly admissible To the US and its allies as recent pressure campaigns against India, Pakistan and others have shown. Everything indicates that the inadequacy of the concept of the “West” as a synonym for the “free world” will become even more evident once the acute phase of the European crisis passes and the US turns its attention back to Asia. A possible alternative is that the “free world” is used to distinguish between democracies and autocracies. The problem is that autocracy seems to be an emerging disease in almost every country, including the United States itself, and if shared values rather than common defence represent the raison d’\u00eatre of the group, then it is not clear that leadership must necessarily be North American.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this context, Anne-C\u00e9cile Robert analyses in Le Monde Diplomatique<\/em><\/a> <\/u><\/em> the delicate role of the United Nations in managing the new global order. Refugee crisis, food crisis, health crisis… all the UN agencies are active in the face of the war in Ukraine. Yet the institution has failed in its core mission of maintaining peace and security: it took General Secretary Ant\u00f3nio Guterres fifty-four days to carry out a diplomatic initiative. After the UN’s fiasco in Syria, there is a danger that another failure could be final and devastating for the organisation. It is certainly not the first time that the fundamental principles of the UN Charter have been attacked by one of the five permanent members of the Security Council. The invasion of Iraq by the Washington and London-led coalition in 2003 was one of the most spectacular crises and more recently, the illegal bombing of Syrian chemical facilities by the US, France and the UK in April 2018 also prompted an emergency meeting of the Security Council. Symptomatic of the current paralysis, the General Assembly \u2013which in theory cannot interfere in a situation handled by the Security Council\u2013 exceptionally took over the two wars (Ukraine and Syria) by virtue of the “Uniting for Peace” resolution adopted on 3 November 1950. It allows the General Assembly to formulate a political opinion on a crisis in the event of an impasse among members of the Security Council, without, however, being able to take coercive measures. To avoid this, many voices have been raised calling for the abolition of the right of veto, but this apparently simple idea ignores history. If the creation of the United Nations in 1945 is obviously a product of circumstances \u2013the ravages of war and its atrocities\u2013 it is above all the fruit of a political agreement between the great powers. They agreed that, unlike the League of Nations, the new world organisation would be endowed with real coercive powers. In return, they obtained the privilege of being able to block a decision alone. Ultimately, without the right of veto, there is no UN. The abolition of this right would therefore entail the paradox of weakening further the organisation from which the powers, great or medium, would be alienated while the world would be divided into competing baronies and spheres of influence. In conclusion, as international relations are being put back together in disarray, collective security has never seemed so fragile since the Cuban crisis of 1962. There is thus an urgent need to reform the United Nations to restore its credibility and to give it the means to preserve universal peace and protect human dignity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Regarding Catalonia, Tundu Lissu, Tanzanian opposition leader, invited by the CETC to participate in the seminar “Political repression and exile in Africa: the case of Tanzania<\/a>“, analyses the similarities between political repression in Tanzania and Spain in an interview with Vilaweb<\/em><\/a>. Lissu says that the struggle for independence in Catalonia and the struggle for democracy in Tanzania are part of a broader cause: the struggle against political repression in the world. He says that the violence with which the Spanish state repressed the October 1st referendum is reminiscent of the violence of African dictatorships and that no country that considers itself democratic can criminalise political dissent. Lissu also mentions the situation in Zanzibar \u2013annexed by Tanganyika by force after independence\u2013, which forced the island’s president to sign a treaty of union in exchange for the withdrawal of the Tanzanian army from Zanzibar. There was also a geopolitical dimension to the whole story: Zanzibar’s revolutionary government was very progressive, and the Western allies were determined to intervene militarily on the island to prevent it from becoming a “Cuba of Africa”. This explains why Zanzibar accepted a treaty of union on very unequal terms. The document read that the president of the union would be the president of Tanganyika, and that the union would assume virtually all powers that the island had until then: international relations, territorial defence, fiscal policy, customs policy, airspace… The union with Tanganyika has seriously affected Zanzibar from an economic, political, social and cultural point of view, and this explains why the Zanzibari have always rejected it. Plain and simple: the relationship between Tanganyika and Zanzibar, this misnamed “union”, is a colonial relationship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In an article published in the newspaper Le Monde<\/em><\/a>, the Minister for Foreign Action and Open Government of the Generalitat de Catalunya, Vict\u00f2ria Alsina, explains that democracy is threatened by Pegasus spyware and that, given the circumstances of Catalangate, Spain is the right place to start solving this problem, since between 2017 and 2020 sixty-five phones have been spied on with Pegasus in Catalonia. This includes elected officials, among which there are three former Catalan presidents and the current president, ministers and members of the Catalan Parliament and the European Parliament, as well as journalists, civil society activists and even family members. It seems that this is only the tip of the iceberg. There are still hundreds of potentially infected devices in Catalonia that have yet to be scanned. The two years of research detailed by Citizen Lab indicate that all the evidence suggests a link to the Spanish authorities. Indeed, it is hard to imagine that anyone else would use this software to spy on Catalan personalities who have one thing in common: they are all openly in favour of independence. Alsina also argues that there is an urgent need for European standards and investigations. That is why it is so important for the European Parliament to look into the use of spyware in the EU. Not only for Catalonia, but also for all European citizens, whose rights must be protected throughout the Union and abroad. If the EU fails in this endeavour, others will take the lead in the geostrategic battle to impose their model of a less free society. In order to preserve its human rights leadership in the world, the EU must avoid double standards among its member states and guarantee these rights within its borders. European citizens cannot be spied on for political reasons. The EU must send a clear message that this kind of abuse will no longer be tolerated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Following the Northern Ireland Assembly election, Sinn F\u00e9in (SF) has become the largest party, both in terms of seats and in terms of the popular and preferential vote, and thus for the first time in a century an Irish nationalist party has won the elections. Firstly, Sinn F\u00e9in’s success is mainly due to splits within the Unionists, which have damaged the DUP (Democratic Unionist Party). Indeed, SF obtained only 1.3% more preference votes than five years ago and kept the same number of seats (27), while the DUP lost 3 seats (from 28 to 25) and lost almost 7% of preference votes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Everything indicates that the main causes of the Unionist defeat were opposition to pro-Irish language legislation, support for Brexit and the subsequent rejection of the deal that was negotiated. Peter McLoughlin argues in The Conversation<\/em><\/a> <\/u><\/em> that beyond the symbolism of the nationalist victory, this election represents a profound and structural change that confirms the remarkable growth of the centrist option. The Alliance Party has doubled its parliamentary representation from 8 to 17 seats, making it the third largest political force, and has received the support of those who do not want to be identified as unionist or nationalist. The gains have come mainly at the expense of other cross-community formations such as the Green Party (they have lost the two seats they held in Stormont) and moderate unionist parties such as the UUP (Ulster Unionist Party). The elections have made clear that over the last 20 years the unionist vote has been falling and that the nationalist vote, despite favourable demographic trends, is stagnating. The prospects for the rapid formation of a new executive are scarce, since despite the success of SF, without the agreement of the DUP a government cannot be formed. There are questions over whether it is willing to serve in an administration where Sinn F\u00e9in would occupy the role of prime minister. The fact that is the fact that the DUP insists it will not return to government until changes are made to the so-called Northern Ireland protocol in the Brexit deal are even more problematic. The protocol requires controls on goods coming into Northern Ireland from Britain, which the DUP sees as a de facto separation from the rest of the UK and weakens the union. Yet the election \u2013where the importance of issues such as education, unemployment, health, inflation and housing has been highlighted\u2013 has revealed that the protocol is not a priority even for many unionist voters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As for the likelihood that an SF victory would accelerate the process of reunification of the island, it should be borne in mind that the Good Friday Agreement of 1998 establishes that Northern Ireland will remain part of the United Kingdom and that it can only stop being so with the consent of the majority of the population of Northern Ireland by means of an agreed referendum. The most reliable surveys<\/a> do not suggest, however, that there is overwhelming support for separation from the UK, with around half of the population favouring the current status while 42% would favour reunification. Given the circumstances, it seems likely that the SF will not be calling for a referendum in the short term but in a 5 to 10 year perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, it is relevant that the DUP has blocked the election of the Speaker to the Stormont Assembly in protest against the Northern Ireland Protocol, sparking a new political crisis. The party’s leader, Sir Jeffrey Donaldson, said he is sending a clear message in the EU and to the UK government about resolving issues regarding the post-Brexit trade deal, as Unionists oppose the post-Brexit treaty because of the economic barriers it creates between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. On the other hand, the DUP also refuses to put forward a candidate for the position of Deputy Prime Minister, preventing the formation of a new executive. Freya McClements points out in The Irish Times<\/em><\/a> <\/u><\/em> that this double refusal has a backdrop of worsening tensions between the UK government and the EU over British threats against the protocol. Speculation is growing that the UK government will soon introduce legislation that allows it to unilaterally denounce parts of the protocol.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From the pages of Le Monde Diplomatique<\/em><\/a>, Philippe Descamps and Ana Ota\u0161evic report that thirty years after the start of the war, Bosnia and Herzegovina is still subject to opposing narratives. Firstly, those of the three constituent peoples who fought against each other in the 1990s. Then, those of the regional or world powers that advance their pawns on the Balkan chessboard. Finally, those of the media, which spread a discourse of fear fostering the maintenance of the ethnonationalist reflexes exploited by the parties in power. In this context, the ghosts of the past mortgage the future, as each community maintains its narrative as an alternative way of achieving its former war aims. Thus, in order to avoid the responsibility in the run-up to the October elections, the nationalist leaders who share power continue to play the game of victimising their community. Serbs believe they should apply the skills acquired by the central government over the years to the territorial entity they control, maintaining a dream of independence. Croats stress that they have to secure their place in institutions through electoral quotas, or even by creating a new territorial entity of their own. Finally, Bosnians, who now represent more than half of the population, claim that it is their destiny to create a unitary state of their own.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On May 9, Europe Day was celebrated and it can be said that the European community has managed to consolidate itself as an area of freedom, democracy and the protection of fundamental human rights. The Union has been able to coexist with its own contradictions in a project made up of states with different historical backgrounds, as well as diverse social and cultural structures. The countries that have joined the European project are defined by increased levels of development. This improvement in living conditions in Europe is underpinned by the strengthening of the welfare state and multilateral trade agreements signed within the EU. The management of the health crisis caused by the coronavirus reactivated the European project and showed its capacity to mobilise resources in all areas. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, on the other hand, has brought the Union back into the mirror of its own existential weaknesses, beyond an obvious submission to NATO’s military interests or the inability to control its own foreign policy. Europe has been strengthened by fossil fuels and trade agreements with partners that could not possibly be part of the EU institutions. With no feasible alternative in the short term, Europe’s economy remains anchored to Russian gas imports and there is no unanimity on the need for a common policy in this regard. At the same time, inflation is beginning to erode the real economy of European families and businesses. Now the question is whether Europe’s citizens are willing to pay the price to defend their principles of freedom and democracy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this context, the editorial of Le Monde<\/em><\/a> <\/u><\/em> notes the paradox that while celebrating the birthday of the end of the Second World War \u2013which also marks the beginning of reconciliation between Germany and France\u2013, both countries seem to take a back seat to Russian aggression in Ukraine. It is as if the conflict has caught them by surprise. Berlin saw the invasion as an attack on its economic model, its energy options, its policy of openness towards Vladimir Putin and its pacifism. Meanwhile in Paris, the conflict directly challenges Emmanuel Macron’s bid to address the Russian president, an approach that sought to anchor Russia to Europe. In the context of an unprecedented crisis, which involves not only the values but also the security of the European Union, Paris and Berlin must play a driving role as they always do. The planned approval in early June of a special fund of 100 billion euros for the German army announced by Chancellor Scholz three days after the outbreak of the conflict could be an opportunity for Germany to put an end to its hesitations by committing a significant portion to European defence projects. In this area, as in that of economic recovery or the way the Union makes decisions, Le Monde<\/em> considers that the time has come to take decisive action.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the economic front, Fr\u00e9d\u00e9ric Munier and Rodolphe Desbordes point out in Slate<\/em><\/a> that the current crisis is proving to be an example of the use of so-called “geoeconomics”, which can be defined, in the context of foreign policy, as the use of economic instruments to influence the political objectives of another country. As early as 1989, the military strategist Edward Luttwak published an article<\/a> in which he foresaw the generalisation. He argued that in the dual context of globalisation and the end of the Cold War, the balance of power would be based on economics rather than on military means. This shift from military geopolitics to geoeconomics derives in large part from the interdependence generated by economic globalisation. It is true that traditional geopolitics has not disappeared, but its exercise is based on the weapons of our time: less steel and more capital, fewer shells and more sanctions. With globalisation, political actors tend to replace the threat of military sanctions with economic sanctions. The reason for this is twofold: the geo-economic balance of power targets the very foundations of globalisation, i.e. value creation without permanently destroying capital, infrastructure and cities or directly killing people, as conventional warfare does. With sanctions, the positive-sum game of liberal globalisation becomes a zero-sum game: not everyone wins when they play the geoeconomics game. While traditional sanctions, such as arms or trade embargoes, continue to be used, those that have seen the greatest growth are directly linked to financial globalisation and the mobility of people. Financial integration, better monitoring of payments, the extraterritoriality of US law associated with the prevalence of the use of the US dollar and the willingness to use targeted sanctions have contributed to this diversification of the instruments of geoeconomics. Even so, sanctions do not always achieve their goals. On average, they can be considered fully successful in just around a third of cases. In the case of Ukraine, we may fear that geoeconomics will give way to classical geopolitics, especially if Russia succeeds in strengthening its trade with economic partners that have remained neutral, such as China. Finally, it is important to remember that if economic sanctions fail to achieve their aims, they have terrible consequences for the populations that are subjected to them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Charles Wyplosz<\/a> reflects on the possible causes of the current generalised rise in inflation. For the last ten years, inflation has been low, below the targets set by most central banks in developed countries. Suddenly, inflation has shot up without warning and the question of purchasing power has become a major issue. The causes of this dramatic rise in inflation are unclear and the author points to four main explanations. Firstly, there are those who believe that central banks are to blame, because in the case of the US and the EU, for example, they have increased their currency issuance by a factor of three. Secondly, central banks, which assured a few months ago that this sudden rise was strictly temporary, excluding any action to enforce the core of their responsibility, which is price stability. Although some central banks have admitted that they have been badly mistaken and are changing their policy, the ECB is sticking to its temporary line. Thirdly, there are those who believe that governments are to blame \u2013and not central banks\u2013 since they borrowed heavily to distribute colossal bailouts to individuals and companies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, there are those who gather explanations to claim that this rise was unpredictable. They speak of surprising bottlenecks in long production chains, which include a multitude of producers spread all over the world. If one of them cannot keep up, or if ports suddenly become congested and there are not enough ships to transport the goods, a chain of blockages happens. The author argues that we have clearly entered a new era in inflation and monetary policy. A whole generation has lived with price stability. Central banks have developed strategies aimed at this goal, which have been made possible by their independence from governments. Strengthened by their prestige, they took on new responsibilities, such as financial stability. But now the wheel has turned. They have tried to push up inflation, which is too low in relation to their objectives, by making up new instruments: negative interest rates and massive money creation. It has not worked. Then, after years of too low inflation, they failed to see too high inflation coming.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Louis de Catheu argues in Le Grand Continent<\/em><\/a> <\/u><\/em> that at a time when ecological planning is at the heart of the political debate, the model of a state that limits itself to exercising its regulatory powers no longer makes sense. The author sets out the hypothesis of what could be a developmental state applied to the energy transition, building coalitions in the service of a green industrial policy. Indeed, he considers that the market-regulating state seems incapable of carrying out the ecological transition. In this respect, the rapid industrialisation and economic growth of certain Asian economies in the second half of the 20th century can be used as a case study. The foundations for a future state of green development are thus to be found in various industrial experiences. In order for this model to achieve consensus in society, several social groups must be mobilised, and the author argues that a green industrial policy is undoubtedly the best way to bring all these groups together. In the face of the political blockages faced by regulation and pricing policies, environmental policies today take the form of major investment plans in green infrastructure and technologies. New sectors should therefore be supported because they can benefit from economies of scale and the learning effect. The establishment of a state of development, intervening more directly and vigorously in industrial matters, therefore seems a necessity to accelerate the ecological transition. To achieve this agenda, it is important to build a coalition of social groups and economic sectors interested in and convinced of the need for the transition. Once this coalition has been formed, the State will have to mobilise and reinforce three tools as a priority to coordinate, support investment, create new markets and move away from dependence on technology: planning, public banking and research support. The public authorities must define a decarbonisation trajectory, making explicit the necessary transformations to reduce the uncertainty that weighs on private agents. For if climate change and its material and political consequences make sustainable investments desirable, private actors are poorly prepared to identify them. Ultimately, the ecological transition requires a high level of coordination among sectors (public institutions, private companies and civil society). For this vision to become a reality, the State will also have to equip itself with new intervention tools: green funds, a reinforced European public bank, a public asset manager, or even an innovation-financing agency.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, The Economist<\/em><\/a> <\/u><\/em> analyses the changes that the COVID-19 pandemic has brought to the world of work through the rise of surveillance tools. According to a study by the European Commission, global demand for spyware on employees doubled between April 2019 and April 2020. In the weeks following the lockdowns of March 2020, searches for surveillance tools increased more than 18-fold. Surveillance software developers have reported large increases in sales. Companies have many valid reasons to monitor their workers. One is security: tracking the whereabouts of staff in a building can help locate them in an emergency. Another is to keep money and data safe. To ensure that employees do not share confidential information, banks such as JPMorgan Chase do not only track calls, chat histories and emails, but also keep track of how long staff are in the building and how many hours they have worked. Another reason for companies to monitor their workers is to measure (and improve) productivity. In the last two years, there has been an explosion of corporate tools that claim to be able to tell if an employee is working and how hard. Employers can track every keystroke or mouse movement, access webcams and microphones, scan emails for gossip or take screenshots, often without warning employees. Many of the surveillance products are based on artificial intelligence, which has come a long way in recent years. Gathered responsibly, this data can improve overall business performance and benefit individuals. Greater monitoring of workers’ schedules can help prevent their burnout. Technology can also empower some employees in the face of prejudice or discrimination. Still, critics of surveillance believe that companies cannot be trusted with this kind of information. In 2020, after an angry staff backlash, Barclays, one of Britain’s biggest banks, was forced to stop using a software programme that tracked the time employees spent at their desks and flagged those who took breaks that were too long. If we add privacy concerns (and especially if this intrusion moves from the office to the house), it is not surprising that workers are sceptical about the value of surveillance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Illustration:<\/strong> Alexis Lavoie, \u201cRetomb\u00e9es 2\u201d, 2014<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pilar Querol, H\u00e8ctor G\u00e1mez and Arnau In\u00e9s, trainees at the CETC, have contributed to this issue 61 of Diari de les Idees<\/em>.<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This new edition of Diari de les Idees is released in a moment marked by the substantial change in Europe’s geopolitical structure due to the applications for NATO membership submitted by Finland and Sweden, thus putting an end to their traditional policy of neutrality. The war in Ukraine also allows us to reflect on the danger of escalation of the conflict and the use of concepts such as the Cold War and the “free world” that we all thought were outdated. On the other hand, we also devote our attention to a European policy that is also subject to the\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":56821,"template":"","category_newspaper":[454],"segment":[],"subject":[],"class_list":["post-57343","newspaper","type-newspaper","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category_newspaper-454"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nDiari de les idees 61 – 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-61\/\" \/>\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 61 – IDEES\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"This new edition of Diari de les Idees is released in a moment marked by the substantial change in Europe’s geopolitical structure due to the applications for NATO membership submitted by Finland and Sweden, thus putting an end to their traditional policy of neutrality. The war in Ukraine also allows us to reflect on the danger of escalation of the conflict and the use of concepts such as the Cold War and the “free world” that we all thought were outdated. On the other hand, we also devote our attention to a European policy that is also subject to the\u2026\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-61\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"IDEES\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-05-25T12:01:49+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/Alexis-Lavoie_Retombees-2_2014.jpg?fit=878%2C607&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"878\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"607\" \/>\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=\"28 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-61\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-61\\\/\",\"name\":\"Diari de les idees 61 – IDEES\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-61\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-61\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/05\\\/Alexis-Lavoie_Retombees-2_2014.jpg?fit=878%2C607&ssl=1\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-05-19T06:34:47+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-05-25T12:01:49+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-61\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-61\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-61\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/05\\\/Alexis-Lavoie_Retombees-2_2014.jpg?fit=878%2C607&ssl=1\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/05\\\/Alexis-Lavoie_Retombees-2_2014.jpg?fit=878%2C607&ssl=1\",\"width\":878,\"height\":607},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-61\\\/#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 61\"}]},{\"@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 61 – 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-61\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Diari de les idees 61 – IDEES","og_description":"This new edition of Diari de les Idees is released in a moment marked by the substantial change in Europe’s geopolitical structure due to the applications for NATO membership submitted by Finland and Sweden, thus putting an end to their traditional policy of neutrality. The war in Ukraine also allows us to reflect on the danger of escalation of the conflict and the use of concepts such as the Cold War and the “free world” that we all thought were outdated. On the other hand, we also devote our attention to a European policy that is also subject to the\u2026","og_url":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-61\/","og_site_name":"IDEES","article_modified_time":"2022-05-25T12:01:49+00:00","og_image":[{"width":878,"height":607,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/Alexis-Lavoie_Retombees-2_2014.jpg?fit=878%2C607&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"28 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-61\/","url":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-61\/","name":"Diari de les idees 61 – IDEES","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-61\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-61\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/Alexis-Lavoie_Retombees-2_2014.jpg?fit=878%2C607&ssl=1","datePublished":"2022-05-19T06:34:47+00:00","dateModified":"2022-05-25T12:01:49+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-61\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-61\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-61\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/Alexis-Lavoie_Retombees-2_2014.jpg?fit=878%2C607&ssl=1","contentUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/Alexis-Lavoie_Retombees-2_2014.jpg?fit=878%2C607&ssl=1","width":878,"height":607},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-61\/#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 61"}]},{"@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\/57343","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":5,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/newspaper\/57343\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":57350,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/newspaper\/57343\/revisions\/57350"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/56821"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=57343"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category_newspaper","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/category_newspaper?post=57343"},{"taxonomy":"segment","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/segment?post=57343"},{"taxonomy":"subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/subject?post=57343"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}