Hello and welcome to a slightly delayed edition of Active Measures, my weekly newsletter on hostile foreign influence operations and our attempts to counter them.
The delay is because I have been watching the compressed, virtual edition of the Munich Security Conference, featuring Biden, Merkel, Macron, Johnson and others. Watch it here if you missed it.
My main thoughts:
Biden was in great form, underlining his “we’re back” approach by highlighting his administration’s multilateralist approach to global problems. Those who say he’s senile, or defeatist on China are looking silly.
His problem is that allies are thin on the ground. Angela Merkel was looking tired. She rightly pointed out that dealing with China (bigger, stronger) is more complicated than Russia. But Germany faces an election this year followed by tortuous coalition talks. My guess is that we will have a “black-green” coalition headed by the impressive Bavarian leader Manfred Söder. He can give a “Germany’s back” speech in 2022.
By then, Emmanuel Macron will be busy fighting for re-election, so don’t expect serious big-country leadership in Europe until 2023. To be fair, the French leader was less awful than in 2019, when he demolished French credibility on security with a woolly rant about resetting ties with Russia. Nor did he say that Nato was braindead. He gave a good answer to a question about “strategic autonomy”, saying that Europe must do more in its own defence. True. Where’s the money? Until we get real spending on real weapons, with real people doing real exercises, this is empty talk. The EU officials (von der Leyen and Michel) were underwhelming, too.
Boris Johnson was in good form (and I say that as someone who wouldn’t trust him to run a bath, let alone my country). The optics were not great — he didn’t appear on the stage with Biden, Macron and Merkel, supposedly because he was still busy finishing today’s G7 meetings. But he made the most of his slot as the final speaker, biffing Russia and China and giving a characteristically rambunctious performance.
But where’s the beef? The US administration is more optimistic about Britain than the other members of the European “Quad” — France and Germany — but attention is shifting to other countries. The coming year will be a good time if you are a (say) Dutch, Nordic, Baltic or central European politician with some workable ideas on what to do about Russia and China.
On that note, keep an eye out for Lithuania and Estonia, both with ambitious new governments keen to make their mark.
What I’ve been writing: My CEPA column was on that subject, highlighting the Baltic states’ role in derailing the 17+1 summit. An Estonian tells me, “We may not be the world’s greatest China experts, but we are the greatest experts on communism”.
Plenty more on that in this week’s China Influence Monitor, my weekly newsletter on Beijing’s westward footprint. I highlighted the numerous warnings from spookdom (Estonia, Finland, the Netherlands and Norway). Estonian concern about China’s bullying tactics was neatly underlined by the embassy in Tallinn, which told the Estonians to shut up.
My Monday Times column looked at proposals for tighter lobbying laws in the UK. I argued that we do need to do more, but we should beware overreach. Our greed and complacency are our greatest national-security weaknesses (and self-inflicted, to boot).
I will be back in your inboxes next week.
Best regards, Edward