{"id":61640,"date":"2022-12-22T14:03:34","date_gmt":"2022-12-22T12:03:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-74\/"},"modified":"2023-01-31T17:09:11","modified_gmt":"2023-01-31T15:09:11","slug":"diari-de-les-idees-74","status":"publish","type":"newspaper","link":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-74\/","title":{"rendered":"Diari de les idees 74"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In this last issue of the year of Diari de les Idees<\/em> we highlight the challenges of the rearrangement of the new global multipolar geopolitical era, the impact of new types of protests against the two authoritarian regimes in China and Iran, the Qatargate scandal in the European Parliament that calls into question the credibility of European institutions and the European project in these troubled times, or the stagnation of the Spanish Senate activity due to the needed renewal of members of the Constitutional Court of Spain, by which the Spanish democracy has gotten off the track of the institutional rail it has followed until now. We have also the alarming news from the Western Balkan with the increasing tensions in Kosovo, the diverse interpretations as for a possible end of globalization, the relevant role of women in the fight against climate change, and the hope of a possible clean, economical, and endless energy source that nuclear fusion would provide.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the field of international politics, German chancellor Olaf Scholz has written an extensive article on Foreign Affairs<\/a><\/em>. He states that we are facing a new Zeitenwende<\/em>, an epoch shift, a change in the global paradigm caused by the Ukraine war, which changes constantly the agents and power focus, and forces the European Union to strengthen internally. From his point of view, the European bridge must be Germany, which should have a central role in guaranteeing security in Europe by increasing its own military budget. In this sense, Germany has also started the European Sky Shield Initiative<\/em><\/a> <\/em>to establish a political intergovernmental cooperation to which 14 European countries have adhered. Scholz emphasizes that the Russian invasion has not only unified the EU and the NATO, but has also led to changes in energy and economic policies. Germany will import liquified gas from other markets in the following months, has proposed a deadline for the shutdown of its nuclear plants, has put temporarily in standby coal production and has fostered transition towards sustainable energy. As for European integration, Scholz argues a closer cooperation is needed between Germany and France to solve issues such as immigration and economic policies. That is why Germany wants to change the voting system in sectors like foreign affairs and taxes so that decisions are taken by majority and not unanimity. Lastly, what the current Zeitenwende<\/em> demands is a new way of thinking that allows forging new alliances which should be a deterrent for a new global division into blocs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Shannon Tiezzi asserts in the The Diplomat<\/em><\/a> <\/em>that protests against the COVID-zero policies of the Chinese government have rapidly turned into claims of a wider scope about freedom, human rights, and democracy. In this sense, what the Chinese Communist Party is more worried about is the fact that protests share a common symbolism, albeit spontaneous and with no leading figure, with slogans such as \u201cWe want to eat, no PCR-tests. We want freedom, no lockdowns.\u201d Up until now, Chinese people and people from other authoritarian regimes did not want to assume the costs of protesting against official policies, and they blamed it on the victims when authorities repressed them. Moreover, it is precisely because of this that now protests are so strong: nobody thinks the people that died because of COVID-zero policies are to blame. Furthermore, protests have also weakened one of the favourite pretexts of the regime: all dissidence is backed up by \u201chostile foreign forces\u201d. A remark used plenty to repress the pro-democracy movement of 1989, the recurrent ethnic protests of Tibet and Xinjiang, and more recently the 2019 Hongkong protests. It is too soon to assess whether the current protests will actually have some impact, but COVID-zero policies have already had a huge impact on Chinese society raising awareness against the regime\u2019s abuses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Following the lead of discontent against authoritarian regimes, in Le Monde Diplomatique<\/em><\/a> St\u00e9phane Dudoignon points out that the Iranian regime has taken the rough approach against the protests that have been taking place since the end of September in order to regain control (which includes public executions). A faction in the religious circles, however, thinks the lack of conciliating mechanisms between the power and protesters is regrettable. These cracks in the clerical body are not new in a country where the majority Shiite and minority Sunnite institutions have at their disposal resources that allow a relative internal pluralism, often backed up by strong trusts. The novelty is the fear expressed by part of the clergy of seeing out of control the conjunction of urban insurrections that are unfolding in Iran. On the other hand, the power fragmentation present since the Khomeini era, the dependence on transnational militia, and the ideological rearmament of the Guardians of the Revolution fuel the escalation and have reduced the contemporary Iranian history to a succession of crisis increasingly marked by hyperviolence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the same journal, Micha\u00ebl Levystone<\/a> highlights that none of the Central Asian states have publicly condemned the Russian aggression on Ukraine, it has nonetheless caused great discomfort in the whole regions. If until a few months Moscow a was thought to be one to guarantee of security, now Russia has to see how other actors such as the United States challenge its monopoly, who are back after Afghanistan\u2019s defeat. Kazakhstan, Kirghizstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan have close ties with Moscow, but have also built good relations with Ukraine, and during the UN voting sessions of the rulings to condemn the Russian aggression and the Russian annexation of Ukraine territories, these countries displayed a cautious neutrality stance: their representants refrained from voting or did not participate in it. Behind this fa\u00e7ade of unity there are, however, many nuances. Turkmenistan and Tajikistan remain in careful silence because they do not wish to make Russia an enemy of themselves, as it guarantees their security against their neighbour, Afghanistan.\u00a0 Kirghizstan has showed a more erratic position: after what it seemed like a legitimation of the Russian attack, the Central Asia state ended up recognising the right of Ukraine as a sovereign state. The two Central Asiatic republics that have expressed explicitly their support for Ukraine are Uzbekistan and, especially, Kazakhstan, where there is an important Russian minority in the Northern provinces. Another common reaction in the Central Asia states is the refusal to sending seasonal workers to Ukraine to fight, which has been in place since Putin\u2019s recruitment that started in September. At the same time, the image of a Russia bogged down in the Ukraine war has urged the republics to diversify their alliances to guarantee their security, which has only been beneficial to the traditional adversaries of Moscow. Therefore, since the start of the war, China signed military cooperation treaties with its oil (Kazakhstan) and gas (Turkmenistan) providers. Beijing has also strengthened as a weapon provider in the Central Asia regimes like Turkmenistan, to which China has sent anti-aircraft defence systems. Since the invasion of Ukraine, the influence strategy shown by the Turkish president Erdo\u011fan has also a military dimension. Ankara has signed a treaty of global strategic association coupled with a framework treaty for an enhanced military cooperation with Uzbekistan, a framework treaty of military cooperation with Tajikistan and, above all, a treaty of strategic collaboration with Kazakhstan, which entails the founding of a drone line production. Finally, the United States have also profited from the war to regain their place in Central Asia. Their strategy to reacquire regional influence is focused on the fight against terrorism, eyes pointed to Afghanistan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the journal Conflits<\/em>,<\/a> Bertrand Slaski, director of the Dakar International Forum<\/a> and of the Global Initiative for Peace and Security in Africa<\/a>, points out that the United States are again interested in Africa and that the summit between the two that took place on December has outlaid the strategic bets that Washington has for the African continent. Their goal is to counter both Russia and China, but also to have a stable footing in a continent that they have left to the side for a long time. In a moment in which there is a profound change in the great geopolitical balances going on, Africa is now object of a renewed attention, both from the traditional and emergent powers. It is not a matter of having a guaranteed access to natural resources and emergent markets fostered by a swift economy anymore. The powers also want to attract the highest number possible of African states to their field with the goal of having more international influence and, possibly, of imposing their own model of government. With the Russian and Chinese advances of the late years, the north-American diplomacy has decided to start acting to regain its presence in this forgotten geographical space. To this end, Biden\u2019s administration presented the late summer the document U.S. Strategy Toward Sub-Saharian Africa<\/a>, which after the relative victories in African politics of the two previous U.S. presidents, redefines the approach of the United States in the region. Nonetheless, considering the obstacles in the way, it is possible that Biden\u2019s administration could not change short-term African-U.S. relationships. Firstly, there is not enough time until next presidential elections of 2024, as the United States have other priorities both nationally and internationally. While China is at the centre of the foreign affairs strategic policies of the United States, the latter has also to solve the Iranian nuclear issue, as well as organizing a response for Russian aggression on Ukraine. Internally, the challenges are also considerable: limit inflation, facing climate change impact and, above all, curbing the democratic crisis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As for the Ukraine war, in Le Grand Continent<\/em><\/a> Jean-Marie Gu\u00e9henno argues that the conflict is simultaneously total and limited, because outside the territory where war is waged to the maximum intensity, neither Russians nor Westerners can mobilize their societies fully. Gu\u00e9henno also points out that in this huge mix of great fragility and extreme violence, Europe is trapped between the two sides, and this forces Europe to think what means the war in Ukraine for the European continent. At first sight, the war accelerates the geopolitical awareness between European states which, including Germany, are raising their military budgets and are overcoming their differences through the voting of sanctions for Russia and adopting aid measures for Ukraine. The war is far from finishing, but there are already noticeable strategic consequences. The first one is the loss of the central role of Europe. War has united the Europeans, but it has confirmed the distance between Europe and the rest of the world. The second one is the speeding up of a long-lasting weakening for Russia. Militarily, Russia is showing its limits of conventional armies and the squandering of its immense nuclear arsenal. Economically, Russia still has an economy of basic products whose value will diminish due to the energy transition. The brain drain, Western companies leaving, and the technological sanctions worsen this handicap. Politically, a Russian defeat in Ukraine may cause the shock that would finally allow Russia to face its past, complete its post-soviet transformation and set up the foundations of a true federal democracy. However, the current tendency towards ultranationalism also presents the risk of a breaking with the United States. The war makes the majority of European states eager for the north-American guarantee of security. This will have its cost. The United States do not expect Europeans to contribute seriously in the military balance of Asia, but they will demand that Europeans side with them in the economic relations with China. Therefore, Europe is trapped between two dependencies: one on the United States for its own security and one on the China for its economy. Finally, the last consequence is the most unsure: the impact this war will have on China and the balance with the States. In the short-term, the war in Ukraine seems to serve the Chinese interest, as it increases Russian dependence on China and distracts the United States from their priority towards China. Nevertheless, the war also accelerates the awareness of Western states about the strategic dimension of international economic relations and the strengthening of ties between Europe and the United States, two facts that hinder the implementation of the Chinese strategy of diluting conflict with the win-win rhetoric. In the end, everything depends on how China will assess the new power balance and how the United States will manage their own relationship with China.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lastly, in Foreign Affairs<\/em><\/a> <\/em>Marlenne Laruelle underlines that although some Western observers have not only speculated about Russia\u2019s rupture, but also support it, a rupture in the country would not solve the problem of the West with Russia. To her understanding, any positive output for Russia and its neighbours like Ukraine or the rest of the world will need Russia to reimagine her inner federalism, instead of disintegrating. It is clear that the war in Ukraine could see an increase in petitions of greater autonomy from Moskva, since September\u2019s troop mobilization has caused a violent reaction in areas inhabited by ethnic minorities. The deepest demographic changes could also see an increase in petitions for decentralization. 19 out of the 20 Russian regions with positive demographic growth have a relatively high percentage of non-ethnic Russians. Nevertheless, ethnic minorities do not demand secession and the polls show that there is a strong Russian patriotism in the ethnic republics. It would also be a mistake to assume that the empowerment of minorities would automatically contribute to a Russia more in harmony with Western standards. Ethnic minorities are not more prone to democracy, human rights, good administration, and pro-Western liberalism than the ethnic Russian majority. On the other hand, the main cultural division is not between ethnic and non-ethnic Russians, but rather between the huge urban areas and the rest of the country: areas industrially depressed, rural provinces, and ethnic republics. In the last decade, the big Russian cities have showed increasing hints of compromise with civil society and a basic pluralism, albeit this trend has been repressed, especially since the war\u2019s outbreak. The inhabitants of rural areas and minorities instead tend to be more conservative regarding cultural habits and support more an authoritarian regime. Therefore, advocate for a collapse in Russia is the wrong strategy, based in the ignorance of what binds together Russian society despite its diversity. In addition, more important, this strategy does not take into account that a rupture in Russia would be disastrous for international security. A collapse could cause several civil wars in which new states would battle each other for their contended borders and economic resources. In this case, Moskva\u2019s elites, which control a huge nuclear arsenal, would react violently to any type of secessionism. The security services and the forces of law would crush any attempt at democratization if it would mean another break up in the USSR style. In short, even if Russia\u2019s disintegration is improbable, after the disastrous war of Putin the regime will face growing pressures to decentralize. The best result would be local self-governments \u2014 which is present in the Russian Constitution but which Putin refuses \u2014, although this refederalization of Russia would only be possible along with a national reflection about the legacy of Russian colonialism, which would allow the Federation an internal reform.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the Spanish political field, there is worry about the paralysation of the Senate for the renewal of the members of the Supreme Court of Spain that the Court itself must enforce, as it has caused confrontation between institutions. A completely new decision in democracy, because the Supreme Court prevents unblocking the renewal of part of its members that cannot be in office any longer. Consequently, the Court of Constitutional Guarantees ends the legislative process that was started in the lower house of Spain, the Congress of Deputies, and that would have been discussed in the upper house, the Senate. This action has prevented the debate and voting for the new law. We would like to remind that for all practical purposes the reform changes the majorities needed in the General Council of the Judiciary to appoint two magistrates of the Supreme Court. In this moment, the blocking of the two members of the conservative sector makes impossible an agreement by majority of three out of five parts of the plenary. The reform lowers this requisite to simple majority, which would allow dodging the blocking. This decision, taken by a meagre majority of one vote, is a very serious problem that puts Spanish democracy out of the constitutional path on which it had trodden until now. The damage of this attack at the democratic foundations is yet to be calculated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the European field, the focus is on the Qatargate scandal in the European Parliament. The vice-president and an ex-MEP have been charged of influencing the policies of the European Union in favour of Qatar, which constitutes the biggest scandal in the history of an institution that should be an example of political ethics. Furthermore, this scandal takes place in the worst moment possible: European democracies have to face the Russian aggression to Ukraine, but which has also the goal of undermining EU\u2019s model. EU faces a rise of authoritarian practices among its members and the world is shaken by the revival of geopolitical rivalries while Europe fights to have a relevant role as a referee. As the editorial Le Monde<\/em><\/a> <\/em>points out, Qatargate reveals the laxness of European Parliament\u2019s regulations towards ethics, the fight against corruption, the management of conflicts of interests and lobbying. MEP being able to practise as lawyers or consultants while in office is incomprehensible. Euro MP’s or even European Commissioners being able to be hired in the sector where they had worked after their mandate is over is inacceptable. The negligence of the European Parliament regarding ethics and absence of independent control hints at a systemic porosity for bribery and impunity, a suspicion that only harm EU\u2019s political credibility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Michael Gordon analyses in The Conversation<\/em><\/a> <\/em>the ruling of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, which states that the Scottish Parliament has not the authority to celebrate unilaterally a second referendum for independence. As the Scottish Parliament and Government obtained their competences from the Scotland Act<\/a> of 1998, to assess the two main legislative issues the Supreme Court had to rule whether the devolution powers of the Scottish Parliament entailed legislating a voting of this kind. No wider issue related to the holding of a possible independence referendum was raised. The Supreme Court had to rule whether legislating for a referendum was a statutory competence of the Scottish Parliament or a matter reserved for the UK Parliament at Westminster. The Court ruled on two main issues. Firstly, whether the Scottish Government had used the appropriate process when it referred this legal issue to the Supreme Court. The Court ruled yay. The Court then moved on to the second, more substantive issue: whether the Scottish Parliament has the legal power to call a referendum on independence. The Supreme Court decision is undoubtedly clear in terms of legality: the Scottish Parliament cannot hold a second independence referendum. As in 2014, the agreement of the Government and Parliament of the United Kingdom would be required. The decision, however, also reveals a contradiction between UK constitutional law and the democratic mandate obtained by the Scottish National Party to hold a new vote on Scottish independence, a contradiction that is a central feature of statutory devolution arrangements of the UK. Now that the legal options are clear, how to manage this contradiction will be a major challenge to the legitimacy of the UK’s constitutional order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ruth Ferrero warns from the newspaper P\u00fablico<\/em><\/a> that in addition to the war in Ukraine, during the last few weeks increasingly alarming news have arrived from the Western Balkans. And it is well known that every time the Balkans make their appearance on the news, they rarely do so to announce good news. This time the issue stems from Kosovo. Nothing new since this last year the known as “car-tag war<\/a>” has popped up in the media. Yet another time, the unresolved tension between the governments of Pristina and Belgrade makes sparks fly in the mostly Serb-Kosovar region of northern Kosovo. In addition, this all happens despite the fact that since the end of the war disturbances, confrontations, and episodes of greater or lesser severity in relation to the point of friction, that is to say, who has sovereignty over the territory of Kosovo, never ceased to unfold. Serbia continues to appeal to the United Nations Resolution 1244 approved in June 1999 by the Security Council, which established a temporary legal regime of an exceptional nature to replace the Serbian legal order with the aim of stabilizing the situation in Kosovo. Therefore, Serbia does not recognize the independence of this territory proclaimed in 2008. As for Kosovo, it appeals to the non-binding opinion adopted by the International Court of Justice<\/a> in 2010 on whether or not Kosovo’s secession violated international law. The Court’s response was that general international law does not provide for prohibitions on declarations of independence and, therefore, the declaration of February 17, 2008 does not violate general international law. Based on these two positions, the rest of the states have positioned themselves in relation to the recognition or not of the state of Kosovo. In the EU, there are five states that do not recognize it: Slovakia, Romania, Greece, Cyprus, and Spain. This is therefore the starting point: the non-recognition of Kosovo’s independence and the need to seek a negotiated solution to the conflict. Since 2011 the EU has led, with more or less intensity and with more shadows than lights, the mediation process between both parties, although this does not seem to have been enough as evidenced by the worsening of tensions. While it is true that what is happening obeys an internal logic of interests of local political actors, it is no less true that the current situation of the war in Ukraine can be taken advantage of by the actors themselves to accelerate processes in the heart of the region. Thus, the offer of European candidacy to Ukraine and Moldova and, a few days ago, to Bosnia and Herzegovina, has opened a window of opportunity for Kosovo, which, of course, wants to take advantage of it by presenting a candidacy with little chance of success. The task that Brussels has to face it is no little deal: regaining the trust of these countries. Moreover, how if not by accelerating the enlargement of the EU? A complicated issue in the current context. The EU is aware that any escalation of tension between Serbia and Kosovo could derail the rest of the Balkans process, threatening the overall stability of the region and thus further destabilizing the EU. Therefore, it is essential to de-escalate the situation in Kosovo, but for this, it will be necessary to put a greater amount of political capital in the balance to be able to convince the parties in conflict that the European framework is the one that can offer them the most benefits in the medium and long term.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As for the economic field, Guillaume Vuillemey argues in The Conversation<\/em><\/a> whether we are witnessing the end of globalization, a question on which two main interpretations are opposed. For many economists, free trade is a natural state of the global economic system. Any slowdown \u2014 COVID-19, war in Ukraine, the return of protectionism \u2014 can only be due to temporary disruptions that, sooner or later, must be amended: outbursts of irrationality, a momentary rise of political forces that alter economic balances in harmony, etc. Of course, economists who adhere to this point of view do not deny that sometimes free trade can have perverse effects (pollution, increase of certain inequalities). Nevertheless, like Nobel laureate Paul Krugman, they believe that it is almost always better to preserve free trade ex-ante<\/em>, even if it means using the obtained wealth to correct the perverse effects ex-post<\/em>. Sticking to this perspective, the author argues that deglobalization then appears as a frightening phantom, which would obscure two and a half centuries of achievements in terms of economic theory. Now, the problem is that if the consequences of globalization have been so unanimously positive, how can we explain why such a strong, recurrent and lasting opposition arises? To clarify this, we need to rethink free trade in depth, and understand that it has costs that economists have systematically underestimated. This alternative view helps us to understand why, beyond a certain point, free trade can have costs that far exceed its benefits, and why new forms of protectionism and reasoned deglobalization can be justified. The protectionism redesigned in this way does not aim to isolate itself from other countries through a reactive policy, but rather to affirm its own common goods \u2014 natural or marine environments to protect, expertise or strategic interests to preserve \u2014 in a positive action. Ultimately, what such protectionism aims to create is links between economic activities and their legal treatment, including ensuring that their conduct is once again subordinated to common values.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For the past forty years, U.S. lawmakers have promoted and pushed for a neoliberal economic vision. In Foreign Affairs<\/em><\/a>, Rana Foroohar states that economists have finally realized that geographic location plays a huge role in the quality of healthcare public, education or access to drinking water. Foroohar believes that the war in Ukraine has shown that globalization is receding and that in the post-neoliberal world, production and consumption will be much more tied to countries and regions. Labour will be more important compared to capital, and politics will have a greater impact on economic outcomes. After World War II, neoliberalism gained prominence and became the de facto<\/em> world economic system: Western intellectuals and leaders thought that connecting capital markets and international trade with institutions that were above nation-states would avoid anarchy. And it worked, because for a long time there was a feeling that international trade served national interests and not those of multinationals. However, during Clinton’s presidency the paradigm changed: the markets of the liberal democracies traded with Russia, the oil states of the Middle East, and China. Every actor had very different moral and political frameworks. Although globalization was total, now it is receding, at least in terms of capital and goods flow: the 2008 crisis, the pandemic, and the war in Ukraine have made states want to secure the supply of key goods and have realized that different political economies need different financial systems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the occasion of the celebration of COP15<\/a> on biodiversity, in Le Grand Continent<\/em><\/a> Paul Magnette denounces that half a century after the first Earth Summit, the destruction of life continues on a large scale and greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase inexorably. This inability to change course is explained, first, by the resistance of the pillars of the carbon economy, whose vanguard is fossil fuel multinationals. However, these objective obstacles are not enough to explain our inertia. If we advance so slowly, it is also because we are not able to convince the population that radically changing our methods of production and consumption does not necessarily mean giving up. On the contrary, it can be synonymous to progress for the vast majority of humanity. Magnette also argues that a social critique, however powerful, is not enough to change the relations of dominance. The democratic and social revolutions of the last three centuries could not have made the institutions of the old regimes fall if they had not mobilized a vision of the world, an imaginary and symbols that indicate the wished horizon. On the other hand, the various forms of political ecology that have been asserted during the last half century have not succeeded in conceiving a public ethic powerful enough to confront the ethos of accumulation, consumption, and the distinction on which the capitalist system rests. After a century of reforms aimed at decommodifying social relations, Magnette believes that we can identify the political options that are likely to amplify and intensify the climate transition, and to transform our patterns of production and consumption, our social relations and our preferences. Magnette also states that it is necessary to put into act some explicit laws, as taxing harmful behaviours to eradicate them is not enough. It is also necessary because the debates raised by this type of laws rekindle the democratic public space, as evidenced by the history of regulations focused on health, time, and working conditions, road safety, water and air pollution. Magnette also advocates for an increase in taxes on the richest because they produce infinitely more CO2<\/sup> than other social groups. Also because their way of life determines the consumption standards of society in general; because wealth concentration in a handful corrupts democracy. In addition, because we cannot ask the majority to reduce their consumption if an oligarchy avoids the law and continues to enjoy life without any punishment whatsoever. Finally, Magnette defends that public services must be developed and improved (education, health, housing, mobility, food, culture, access to nature, etc.) because they offer the most dulled responses in terms of resources to basic human needs. Moreover, because they create jobs beyond the logic of the market and promote social cohesion and attachment to the common good.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the same time, Ebru \u00d6zdemir highlights in Euractiv<\/em><\/a> the positive impact of women in leadership in areas such as cooperation to achieve sustainable peace and to obtain better results in projects and policies related to the climate. A recent report by the Environmental Justice Foundation<\/a> reveals that the climate crisis increases inequalities and that if climate change affects people in different ways exacerbating existing inequalities, it is women who are most affected. In this sense, climate change is a threat multiplier. UN Women<\/a> stated that these impacts on gender are caused by numerous factors, such as women being more dependent on natural resources, but having less access to them. Women are also primarily responsible for obtaining food, water and fuel, and girls often have to drop out of school to support other women in farm work. Women are also less likely to survive natural disasters, because they have less access to health care. Furthermore, climate change directly affects the physical health of pregnant women. Therefore, it is essential to position the gender perspective at the centre of the debate. A BBC study<\/a> of the list of COP27 participants reveals that women make up less than 34% of negotiating teams, with some teams made up of more than 90% men. \u00d6zdemir concludes that including women in leadership positions, policy making, financing, and implementation of climate change solutions is essential, because a climate solution that is not efficient for women would not be fair or equitable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, and in terms of new technologies, it seems that the Big Tech companies, the spearhead of the world\u2019s economy for the last 20 years, are in trouble. Jeremy Gibert and Alex Williams analyse the latest events in Open Democracy<\/em><\/a>. They point out that a possible explanation could be that a large part of these problems is related to the excessive power and lack of competence of the leaders of the large technological companies. Facebook and Twitter, in particular, appear to be the playthings of their owners rather than businesses well run by professional boards of directors. Within the world of technology, the most significant event of the last two years has been the collapse of the profit-making model described by Shoshana Zuboff as surveillance capitalism. This system devised by Google in the early 2000s has provided enormous benefits to platforms capable of controlling large amounts of data-generating users. But as the global economy has entered a period of stagnation and inflation, advertising budgets have been cut, while scepticism about the supposed effectiveness of the targeted advertising technology model is also on the rise. On the other hand, the authors also highlight the increasingly politically controversial nature of the platforms themselves. If the ideal goal of a platform is disappearing in the background, since 2016 the layer of invisibility of platforms has become thin. Platforms such as Twitter have revealed themselves as actors with enormous economic, political, and publishing power. The authors consider that leaving them at the mercy of their owners or even the dynamics of the market is unsustainable in the long term. The systems and structures built in the last 40 years will remain, of course. The structural power of technological and financial networks is not in doubt, even if the relative power of their owners dwindles. However, the ability of the neoliberal political class and the financial and technological elites to control consent at will and shape public opinion has been eroded. We have thus entered a period of great change, of interrelated crises that threaten the dominance of neoliberalism. These crises range from the climate crisis to stagflation, from the collapse of the geopolitical order to the decline of the authority of the political class. Each of these crises contributes to undoing the basic mechanisms that have maintained global neoliberal hegemony over the past decades. It seems that the future that can emerge from this confusion, a political and economic arrangement that offers some kind of relative stability that secures the interests of at least some key social groups, points in two main directions. One would be a green neo-socialism, a collective effort to deal with the enormous social and environmental challenges we have to face. The other, a populism of a fascist nature, perhaps mixed with a vindictive return to neoliberalism as an unstable third way. The future that awaits us will therefore depend on what happens politically in the next decade.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As for Ana\u00eblle Martin, she warns in The Conversation<\/em><\/a> that although Community Law tends to prohibit discrimination against individuals or groups of individuals based on a particular characteristic such as sex, the practices of certain systems of Artificial Intelligence (AI) have revealed new forms of inequality between women and men, which are more difficult to detect. They are so to the extent that this issue of AI bias updates the terms in which the principle of equality must be formulated. It is urgent that the EU equips itself with new tools to fight against these new forms of discrimination. Vulnerable groups include in particular women and ethnic groups, despite the fact that sex\/gender and race\/ethnicity are characteristics protected by EU law. In fact, machine learning algorithms, which are increasingly used in decision-making, are often based on incomplete or biased data. Problems can arise during the data collection or model development process, problems that can be quite harmful. Since most biases generated by AI do not involve discriminatory intent but are unintentional or accidental, we can speak of indirect discrimination. However, despite its flexibility, this last notion has limits when it comes to algorithmic decisions. A presumption of discrimination can be established by statistical evidence. However, for AI the main difficulty lies in the fact that discrimination is difficult to identify because the reasoning behind unfavourable decisions are not so clearly seen (for example, refusing to give a loan to a woman). Therefore, with the absence of transparency statistical testing is not easy to establish. In its proposed regulation on AI<\/a>, the European Commission provides a set of requirements for reliable AI, among which non-discrimination and equality between women stand out. The Commission also reminds that AI systems can perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination against women. In an AI context, equality therefore implies that the operation of the system does not produce results based on unfair biases, which requires adequate respect for vulnerable groups, such as women.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, the hopes placed on nuclear fusion have peaked up again with the news announced by the U.S. Department of Energy and that media such as The Financial Times<\/em><\/a> had already written about it. Nevertheless, what is exactly nuclear fusion? Fusion is a reaction that allows the release of the energy accumulated in a nucleus of an atom. Unlike fission \u2014 which is the process used in the nuclear power plants we know \u2014 energy release occurs when two light nuclei are combined to create a larger one. In the successful experiment at the Lawrence Livermore Federal National Laboratory in California, hydrogen isotopes kept in a superheated plasma state were fused with helium, bombarding them with laser. The reaction releases a neutron and energy during the process and does not generate radioactive waste. Therefore, nuclear fusion is considered the “Holy Grail” of energy as it imitates the how the Sun and other stars work. However, there is a great distance from theory to practice. Despite the fact that it has long been heralded as a source of clean, cheap and unlimited energy, researchers have never achieved viable large-scale results. A solution to the permanent energy crisis \u2014 and to the climate crisis \u2014 has always generated a mixture of hope and scepticism. In the event that the results of this research are confirmed, it cannot yet be considered a solution to the climate emergency. First, we should keep in mind that this is just a lab result. It will be necessary to see what limitations there are in scaling this technology and what deadlines are set to do so. In this sense, The Washington Post<\/em><\/a> says that at least a decade is needed if the American administration continues with massive investments in the coming years. Second, nuclear fission currently represents only 10% of global energy generation, which allows us to imagine the magnitude of replacing current nuclear power plants. Finally, and without taking into account the high investment costs, the scenario of a hypothetical complete decarbonisation in 2050 would barely allow us to approach the increase of 1.5 degrees in temperature, not to avoid some of the already irreversible consequences of climate change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Illustration: Ellen Ruth, “Never the Full Story, Chapters 1-14”, 2017.<\/sub><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Montserrat Viv\u00f3, Mart\u00ed Serra, and Eudald Mart\u00ednez, trainee students at the CETC, participated in the elaboration of this Diari de les idees<\/em> issue.<\/sub><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In this last issue of the year of Diari de les Idees we highlight the challenges of the rearrangement of the new global multipolar geopolitical era, the impact of new types of protests against the two authoritarian regimes in China and Iran, the Qatargate scandal in the European Parliament that calls into question the credibility of European institutions and the European project in these troubled times, or the stagnation of the Spanish Senate activity due to the needed renewal of members of the Constitutional Court of Spain, by which the Spanish democracy has gotten off the track of the institutional\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":77128,"template":"","category_newspaper":[454],"segment":[],"subject":[],"class_list":["post-61640","newspaper","type-newspaper","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category_newspaper-454"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nDiari de les idees 74 – 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-74\/\" \/>\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 74 – IDEES\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In this last issue of the year of Diari de les Idees we highlight the challenges of the rearrangement of the new global multipolar geopolitical era, the impact of new types of protests against the two authoritarian regimes in China and Iran, the Qatargate scandal in the European Parliament that calls into question the credibility of European institutions and the European project in these troubled times, or the stagnation of the Spanish Senate activity due to the needed renewal of members of the Constitutional Court of Spain, by which the Spanish democracy has gotten off the track of the institutional\u2026\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-74\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"IDEES\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-01-31T15:09:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/Ellen-Ruth_2.jpg?fit=493%2C307&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"493\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"307\" \/>\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=\"35 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-74\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-74\\\/\",\"name\":\"Diari de les idees 74 – IDEES\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-74\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-74\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/12\\\/Idees-dactualitat.jpg?fit=607%2C170&ssl=1\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-12-22T12:03:34+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-01-31T15:09:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-74\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-74\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-74\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/12\\\/Idees-dactualitat.jpg?fit=607%2C170&ssl=1\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/12\\\/Idees-dactualitat.jpg?fit=607%2C170&ssl=1\",\"width\":607,\"height\":170},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-74\\\/#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 74\"}]},{\"@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 74 – 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-74\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Diari de les idees 74 – IDEES","og_description":"In this last issue of the year of Diari de les Idees we highlight the challenges of the rearrangement of the new global multipolar geopolitical era, the impact of new types of protests against the two authoritarian regimes in China and Iran, the Qatargate scandal in the European Parliament that calls into question the credibility of European institutions and the European project in these troubled times, or the stagnation of the Spanish Senate activity due to the needed renewal of members of the Constitutional Court of Spain, by which the Spanish democracy has gotten off the track of the institutional\u2026","og_url":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-74\/","og_site_name":"IDEES","article_modified_time":"2023-01-31T15:09:11+00:00","og_image":[{"width":493,"height":307,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/Ellen-Ruth_2.jpg?fit=493%2C307&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"35 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-74\/","url":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-74\/","name":"Diari de les idees 74 – IDEES","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-74\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-74\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/Idees-dactualitat.jpg?fit=607%2C170&ssl=1","datePublished":"2022-12-22T12:03:34+00:00","dateModified":"2023-01-31T15:09:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-74\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-74\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-74\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/Idees-dactualitat.jpg?fit=607%2C170&ssl=1","contentUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/Idees-dactualitat.jpg?fit=607%2C170&ssl=1","width":607,"height":170},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-74\/#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 74"}]},{"@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\/61640","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\/61640\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":61646,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/newspaper\/61640\/revisions\/61646"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/77128"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=61640"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category_newspaper","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/category_newspaper?post=61640"},{"taxonomy":"segment","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/segment?post=61640"},{"taxonomy":"subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/subject?post=61640"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}