Populism starts out with an exagerrated interpretation of reality from which it then extracts proposals that sound simple and effective, while actually ending up complicating rather than solving issues. It’s in this way that I heard many people of goodwill on the left (and to be honest, also on the right) explain the populist phenomenon which has been worrying many.

However, then it seems to me that some of the same people are following similar practices to those for which they condemn populists, when they face issues which for one reason or another, matter a lot in their view. Take for instance, the field of taxation.

Now, it is true that as revealed by a number of scandals that became salient in recent years, payment of tax dues is being circumvented over big pools of funds. But to claim that this is totally undermining social justice in Europe, or something of that order, is not credible. That also applies to the quick fix solutions that are being  proposed with great urgency.

As elections to the European Parliament approach, there will be an increase in initiatives undertaken by people in the traditional European parties who have no problem to function like tax populists.  

 

***

Eurozone proposals

The “packet” of proposals for reform of the eurozone that the European Commission laid out last week, clearly follows from a deep reflection coupled to a certain sense of prudence. For the proposals amount to a delicate balance between what can be achieved, what should be done and what will be allowed to happen.

One hardly needs to also note how, as soon as an opportunity arises, the Commission acts fast in an effort to gain turf. This is mostly felt in the proposals that describe how to format the duties of the so-called eurozone finance minister. No matter how one looks at it, the Commission’s proposal on this matter would hand it a stronger role in the management of eurozone affairs.

Really, I suspect that the European Commission has dosed its proposals with so much forethought, or should I say cunning... that it might be a good idea to wait a bit more before launching into definitive comments about them. First one needs arrive at a good understanding concerning the real targets that the Commission is aiming for. 

***

Palestine

President Trump’s declaration that the US will recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital is one of the most irresponsible decisions that have been taken since the end of World War II.

In no way does it reflect the need to adhere to some moral compass when evaluating the Palestinian conflict and the duty of the international community to respect the rights of the Palestinian people. In my view and despite what Trump himself has said, neither does it seriously take into account the interests of the US.

The Palestinian people deserve every support they can be given in the efforts that must go on to reach a solution to the Palestinian conflict, one that can only be built on the concept of two equal and free states.

It is a commitment about which Europe (and Malta) must not waver.

American interests require that the US remains a friend of the Palestinian people, of the Arab world, and of the Islamic community worldwide.