Under The Radar – 13 August

Greg Bulla on Unsplash

This week, we discuss:

1. Crunch negotiations between the SNP and Green Party

2. Saudi Aramco bounces back with soaring profits

3. The Democrats’ illegal migrants dilemma

SNP-Green Deal Under Pressure 

What happened?

The SNP and Green Party are in crunch negotiations to secure a deal before Nicola Sturgeon reveals the government’s legislative agenda at the end of the month. However, not all appears to be going smoothly.

What does it mean?

The most obvious implication of a formalised deal is that it would create a pro-independence majority within the Scottish government. The coalition will be hoping that a formal arrangement may put pressure on the UK government, yet there’s little indication that Boris Johnson is softening to the idea of a referendum any time soon.

Government officials are keen to put a final deal before cabinet on Tuesday 17 August, but points of contention risk putting the deal in jeopardy. The SNP are eager to present a united front on climate issues ahead of COP26 in Glasgow, however the Greens refused to vote for last term’s climate bill, slamming the targets for lacking ambition. Instead, the party is applying “maximum pressure” on the Scottish government regarding the future of North Sea oil.

An attempt to paper over the cracks could backfire on both parties. The SNP risk embarrassment on the climate agenda if their own governing partners speak out against their lack of action and ambition, but if the Greens roll over and sacrifice key principles, they risk repeating the mistakes previously made by the Liberal Democrats on tuition fees. Who will be the first to flinch?

Aramco comes back fighting

What happened?

Saudi Aramco, the Kingdom’s energy giant, has seen its profits soar by 300%. Posting their Q2 results, the state-backed oil company revealed net income almost quadrupled from the same period last year to $25.5bn and that it was maintaining its dividend at $18.8bn.

What does it mean?

Aramco’s financial results have surprised many analysts, who predicted a modest bounce-back. The pandemic and spectre of new COVID-19 variants continues to loom over the energy sector, and there were expectations this would dent Aramco’s income. Indeed, when oil prices plunged as travel restrictions took hold, Aramco’s profits nosedived by 25%.

Saudi Arabia’s “crown jewel” has also been a target for hostile actors. Houthi rebels in Yemen have attacked Aramco’s facilities with drones and missiles, whilst last month their systems were hit by a cyber-attack. Despite all this, Aramco achieved “100 percent reliability in the delivery of crude oil”.

Aramco has solidified its position as the most profitable oil company in the world, while Western companies face pressure from governments, investors, and the public to switch to renewable energy.

These results will not sit well with anyone concerned by Monday’s UN climate report, but they will delight the de-facto ruler Mohammed Bin Salman. The Saudi government is the majority shareholder of Aramco by quite a distance, and the dividends will make a big contribution to the Crown Prince’s expensive ‘Vision 2030’ reform projects.

Trouble on the horizon for the Democrats

What happened?

The US Department for Homeland Security submitted an August 2nd declaration as part of ongoing litigation regarding illegal immigration. The document shows that around 210,000 undocumented migrants were apprehended at the Southern border in July.

What does it mean?

This is the most migrants U.S. border authorities have encountered since March 2000, when Border Patrol reported 220,063 apprehensions. Indeed, in the first half of 2021, the number of “enforcement actions” preventing illegal entry were double the total number for 2020, reaching a 20-year record of over one million. Both Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador and Guatemala’s Alejandro Giammattei attribute this to “expectations” raised by Biden’s presidency.

They are not the only ones. Overall public support for the Administration’s immigration stance has been in free fall since Spring. By May, more than two-thirds (Pew Research) of Americans disapproved of Biden’s handling of the crisis. And Vice President Kamala Harris has not helped matters, failing to visit the border for months, even as her own approval ratings tanked.

Of especial significance to Biden’s political capital is growing hostility in Hispanic border communities. The electoral risk this portends was made clear last November, when Trump gained Hispanic support, particularly around the Texas border.

Alas, Biden is in a dilemma. He can keep adhering to the ideological pieties of a professional and media class who look aghast at immigration restrictions. But he will pay a pretty price – alienating working-class voters (of all ethnicities) at the next election.

This Week’s Must Reads

1. ‘The IPCC report is a massive alert that the time for climate action is nearly gone, but crucially not gone yet’ by Greg Jericho for The Guardian

2. ‘North Korea: the failure of ‘maximum pressure’ on Kim’s isolated regime’ by Edward White for the Financial Times

3. ‘Did The White House Knowingly Leave Afghanistan In Chaos? If So, What Are The Possible Outcomes?’ by Melik Kaylan for Forbes

4. ‘Funny old priorities’ by Ben Sixsmith for The Critic

Subscribe

* indicates required

Email Address *

First Name

Last Name

Job Title

Company

Industry

Under The Radar – 06 August

Ang on Unsplash

This week, we discuss:

1. The crackdown on dissent in Belarus

2. Germany sends a warship into the South China Sea

3. Resignations at Nice as new policy begins to take shape

‘We’re on your side’

What happened?

Boris Johnson met Belarusian opposition leader Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya in Downing Street this week, where he provided his full support in her efforts to bring down Alexander Lukashenko’s despotic regime.

What does it mean?

Tsikhanouskaya arrived in London with more on her agenda than a polite meeting with the Prime Minister. She is working her way around the West, putting pressure on governments to turn up the heat on the Belarusian regime by closing the loophole allowing sanction exemptions.

This week has been significant for underlining why the international community must step up efforts to end Europe’s last dictatorship, with Belarus continuing to flout international norms to stifle dissent.

The high-profile case of Olympian Krystina Timanovskaya, who refused to fly to Belarus after she criticised her coaches, is sadly just the tip of the iceberg. Athletes in Belarus have been targeted by the regime as part of a massive crackdown on anyone criticising the government. Many have been imprisoned, and while some lucky ones have fled, Tuesday’s murder of Vitaly Shishov, the head of a Kyiv-based non-profit organisation that helps Belarusians fleeing persecution, proves that no one is out of Lukashenko’s reach.

The rise of such shocking incidents, both within and outside of Belarus’ borders, should sound alarm bells throughout the international community. Unfortunately, we should not be so quick in assuming that such activities are the last desperate gasps of a dying regime. Without tougher measures, the dictatorship will continue to survive and persecute those who campaign for democracy.

One German Warship

What happened?

On Monday, for the first time since the turn of the millennium, the Germans sent a warship into the South China Sea. But despite the historical significance, German Defence Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer marked the occasion with deliberately anodyne comments: “We want existing law to be respected, sea routes to be freely navigable, open societies to be protected and trade to follow fair rules”.

What does it mean?

The Bayern’s voyage indicates a fundamental re-orienteering in German foreign policy. Until now, Germany has been wary of providing any military reproach to ongoing Chinese regional expansion. Partly because of WWII’s legacy on the nation’s psyche, but mainly since the eastern economic powerhouse is Germany’s most valued trading partner, which is something that China has been more than happy to leverage.

On a visit to Germany this year, Chinese Premier Li Keqiang went so far as to praise the near-even export/import split as ‘win-win cooperation’, while also warning against intervention in China’s ‘internal affairs’ – a not-so-cryptic allusion to human rights abuses and aggressive regional expansion.

Thus far, Germany’s attempts to reconcile economic self-interest in the East with strategic alliances in the West has been to Washington’s consternation and detriment. Now the belated willingness to share the burden of risk in antagonising China comes as an overdue but necessary correction. With the imperial hegemon in Asia ascendant, and American might waning, leaving the US to counter China alone will soon cease to be possible.

The sea change in German policymaking here is welcome. Providing it has the wherewithal to stay the course

Nice lose their patience with patients

What happened?

Four members of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice) have resigned in anticipation of a change in policy regarding recommended treatment for ME, also known as chronic fatigue syndrome.

In its updated guidance on ME, Nice will no longer include graded exercise therapy or cognitive behavioural therapy as recommended treatments.

What does it mean?

Chronic fatigue syndrome is one of those conditions that most often pits medical practitioners against their patients. The medical consensus for chronic fatigue is that it is largely a psychological illness best treated through non-pharmaceutical interventions. But sufferers of the condition have long argued that doctors fail to appreciate that their symptoms are real and physical and that the prescribed therapies are not effective.

Five of the twenty-one Nice committee members who drafted the new guidance were patient representatives. Whilst that’s a minority, it’s a higher number than usual, leading to suggestions that more weight was placed on patient views than on published scientific evidence. The wave of resignations from clinical professionals in protest of the new advice supports this view.

But the pitting of “scientific evidence” against “patient views” is unproductive and unnecessary. Medical understandings shift as new information and data points emerge and it is vital that patient testimony features among those data points.

In the past decades, there have been enormous strides in the medical understanding of eating disorders thanks to the tireless advocacy of survivors and their families. There must be much greater collaboration between scientific experts and “experts by experience” – that is, the people who can provide personal insight into how illnesses affect the body and mind. The medical establishment must continue to listen to and value the people that it aims to treat.

This Week’s Must Reads

1. ‘The pandemic has exacerbated existing political discontent’ for The Economist

2. ‘In a world of anodyne corporate PR, we should value the straight talkers’ by Graham Ruddick for The Times

3. ‘How the bobos broke America’ by David Brooks for The Atlantic

4. ‘Covid has shown up western democracy’s childish tendencies’ by Edward Luce for the Financial Times

Subscribe

* indicates required

Email Address *

First Name

Last Name

Job Title

Company

Industry

Under The Radar – 30 July

Stiven Sanchez on Unsplash

This week, we discuss:

1. Whether Britain’s “tilt” to Asia will actually counter an assertive China

2. Plans to transition Facebook from a social media company to a “metaverse” company

3. Black Mirror-style surveillance being deployed in the UK

Should Britain sit this one out?

What happened?

U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin addressed Singapore’s International Institute for Strategic Studies on Tuesday, laying out the Biden administration’s vision for the Indo-Pacific region.

Following the arrival of HMS Queen Elizabeth in the South China Sea this week, Austin argued that Britain might be more helpful as an ally if it did not focus on Asia due to the UK’s “scarce” military resources. He concluded that Britain could be more useful closer to home and in other parts of the world.

What does it mean?

The UK government’s recent security and defence review unveiled a “tilt” to Asia. And the arrival of a new aircraft carrier to the hotly contested South China Sea was intended to send a message to the UK’s allies, as well as her adversaries, that post-Brexit Britain has the will and the resources to establish a presence in the region.

But now the UK has been undermined by its closest ally. Secretary Austin’s remarks in Singapore emphasised how Britain would simply be getting in the way whilst doing little to tilt the balance of power in the West’s favour.

Lloyd has a point – Britain’s modest fleet means that it does make more sense for the U.S. to go it alone. And more importantly, Lloyd has also perceived a more pressing threat to Britain in the North Sea and the English Channel, where the Royal Navy is having to monitor the activities of Russian ships more frequently.

With conflict in Ukraine likely to escalate after last month’s incident off the coast of Crimea, Russia must demand the full attention of the MoD.

It’s the end of the (real) world as we know it 

What happened?

Mark Zuckerberg announced plans to transition Facebook from a social media company to a “metaverse” company. In an interview with The Verge, he outlined several applications of the metaverse, including an “infinite office” that lets users create and experience their ideal workplace through virtual reality.

What does it mean?

First coined in the 1994 sci-fi novel, Snow Crash, the term “metaverse” describes an online world where people communicate in a virtual environment, often using VR headsets. As Zuckerberg phrased it: “instead of just viewing content, you are in it.”

The metaverse’s advocates envision an enhanced reality, built up collaboratively by individuals who are liberated from the limitations of their own circumstances. Zuckerberg heralded the added opportunities it would bring to people who live in places where opportunities for education or recreation are more limited: “it’s the next best thing to a working teleportation device”.

But Zuckerberg’s cyberutopianism is at best naïve, and at worst extremely sinister. As a society, we’re barely able to get to grips with 2-D social media platforms – there is still no consensus on how they should be governed, how their content should be moderated, and what impact they have on our shared sense of reality. Navigating the 3-D version will be immeasurably harder.

And Zuckerberg failed to mention one of the biggest benefits that it would provide for his company: namely, access to an even more granular level of information about users’ habits. Facebook is already able to harvest information on what we choose to click and to share. In the metaverse, it will be able to record how and where we move, how long we look at certain things and how we react to certain stimuli. In other words, it’s a data capitalist’s dream.

Is a Black Mirror-style surveillance society becoming a reality?

What happened?

A recent report published by the campaign group Big Brother Watch has revealed that millions of British citizens are being profiled without their knowledge by “welfare-focused algorithms”.

What does it mean?

Some may argue that profiling for the purpose of identifying a person’s vulnerability to abuse, unemployment, or homelessness is a beneficial preventative measure. However, when surveillance becomes a prerequisite for universal credit and social housing, it’s clear that these methods disproportionately impact the poorest in society.

Whistle-blowers like Edward Snowden and Julian Assange have made us more aware of the everyday surveillance mass populations face. With the proliferation of technology in every facet of our lives, we are constantly being monitored and watched through our phones, home speakers, street cameras and public wifi networks.

But by extending these methods to social welfare, it increasingly resembles the Chinese social credit system – where deductions are made for ‘bad behaviour’, including debt and traffic violations, which results in the loss of certain privileges.

The Chinese model is designed to create incentives that are directly linked to behaviour, which supposedly results in a better civil society. In theory, it sounds well-meaning, but we must then ask the question of who safeguards populations from those doing the watching.

Despite the work done by whistleblowers to alert us to abuse of power and infringements on basic rights of privacy, apathy is allowing the surveillance state to cross more red lines. 

This Week’s Must Reads

1. ‘Lebanon’s year from hell: a diary’ by Chloe Cornish for the Financial Times

2. ‘Why is China smashing its tech industry?’ by Noah Smith for Noahpinion

3. ‘Mapping the advance of the Taliban in Afghanistan’ by The Visual Journalism Team for BBC News

4. ‘Man v food: is lab-grown meat really going to solve our nasty agriculture problem?’ by Jan Dutkiewicz and Gabriel N Rosenberg for The Guardian

Subscribe

* indicates required

Email Address *

First Name

Last Name

Job Title

Company

Industry