A blue-blooded soap opera

Right at the outset, let me tell you this. I'm not a Briton. And considering what the country is going through, I'm glad that I'm not. To be clear, these ARE tough times across the world. Close your eyes, pick a random spot on the globe, and chances are there are problems brewing there. Either in the form of a secessionist movement, or dissatisfaction with the incumbent government. But not in GREAT Britain. While knee-deep in the quicksand called Brexit, the country has found something far more important to worry about - Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. 

They've had enough!

Are they interesting to read about? Sure they are! Are they a glamorous couple? Of course and god bless them! But do they affect the lives of common Britishers? Absolutely not! Do they solve the problem of NHS? Nein! So talking about the so-called Megxit issue is an absolute waste of breath, because at the root of the problem is an antediluvian institution that prolongs its existence by making a fool out every man in the UK - the British monarchy. Or as we call them in India, the 'loan that was never repaid'. The entire episode around Harry and Meghan brings out the worst face of the British monarchy. A racist, classist, misogynist, and highly insecure family whose biggest achievement is their 'birth'. For long, people have blamed the institution and never the actual members of the family. But this time, there is no excuse. The Queen, the Prince of Wales and Prince William are equally responsible for what is unfolding now in Britain. 

Should we empathise with Harry and Meghan? This is a complicated question. Without a doubt, the two of them were treated harshly by the British press. While our teenage escapades tend to remain in our own circles, theirs ended up on the front page as headlines. But that's what most celebrities call 'everyday life'. Life in the limelight can be difficult, and sometimes outright cruel. That's hardly a thing to crib about when your entire livelihood is being funded by the taxpayer. Harry and Meghan have every right to leave this life behind. And they have the tools to make it in the real world. Meghan was a very successful actress before she married, and Harry I'm pretty sure is not completely useless. My problem is with the reaction that this decision has garnered. 

A crisis meeting! That's what the Queen convened to discuss the situation. And on the agenda was a very simple topic. How to deal with Megxit? But the answer is very simple - there is no way to deal with it, because there is no problem in the first place. The monarchy is still stuck in its halcyon days, when Prime Ministers were servants and the public were a nuisance. The silliness of what is unfolding in Britain is unbelievable. And the amount of air-time being given to a non-existent problem is really a sad bit of news. Let them discuss this as a family. As a grandmother trying to make her grandson stay...or as a father trying to make his son stay....or as an elder brother trying to make his younger brother stay. But overreacting to this situation is an important step for the royal family. After all, the monarchy's biggest achievement has been convincing the public of its necessity. 

Entitlement is my birthright, and I shall have it

But how did we reach here? Things must have been pretty bad for the two of them to basically walk away from a life of entitlement. Ever since their engagement, the right wing press in Britain have been gnarling at their feet. Harry has never been a rule-abiding well-behaved prince like his brother William. Maybe being further away from the throne gave him the freedom that William never enjoyed. And then Meghan entered the picture. She was an actress, a divorcee and a person of mixed racial heritage. So for the royal family, she was like the anti-Christ. But nevertheless, love pulled through, and the two got married. And even for a republican like me, the wedding was truly magical. But almost immediately after the wedding, things started to go south. The fact is Meghan is too liberal for the family. A woman with a voice and an opinion is a threat to the monarchy, unless she's in-line for the throne. In which case she's decisive and well-informed. The duplicity is pathetic. So if you're waiting for a list of reasons why Megxit is happening, there aren't any. The royal family could not stomach the Sussexes' free-thinking. And they stood by and watched as the press tore them apart for the smallest of things. 

So if anyone is responsible for this crisis, it's the very people who are trying so hard to solve it. And this should ideally get the people of Britain thinking. At least in India, our government tries to destroy our secular fabric when our economy isn't doing well. That's how we hide the real issues in India. But you have an entire institution catering to this. A royal wedding, a royal baby, a coronation, or a royal separation. Nobody's talking about Brexit are they?

It's remarkable how unremarkable Macron is!

Macron with former president Hollande

Here's the thing about leaders like Modi and Trump. They are controversial, even genocidal some might argue(and rightly so). When you share the stage with those kind of leaders...hogging the limelight can be a very difficult thing to do. You can either be just as bad as them, like Boris Johnson. Or chart a different course at your own expense. Enter French president Emmanuel Macron. A former investment banker, and a self-proclaimed centrist. There's nothing that stands out in Macron's personality. I don't understand a word of French, but I can still make out that he's a bad orator. His demeanour is often tentative and he was quite literally manhandled by Trump on one occasion.

But Macron has his moments. His policies are largely popular(we'll get to the bad part later). And in an era of autocrats, Macron has been willing to spearhead moves aimed at diffusing tensions in theatres of conflict. And he's not afraid to be outspoken. It takes a lot of courage to call the NATO a 'brain-dead organisation'. He's taken on Brazil's Bolsonaro and Turkey's Erdogan, and more importantly come out unscathed from those battles. Truly a remarkable achievement. 

Yellow vest protesters

But all's not well for Macron at the moment. Within France he's facing one of the largest popular movements in 21st century Europe. And his foreign escapades have garnered some attention to. But as our ultra-nationalists keep saying, 'country first'. So let's talk about the domestic problem. Macron came to power with a promise to bring about sweeping economic reforms.

Yellow vest protesters

 As a member of former president Hollande's government, Macron had already started introducing some of these changes. After he took over, Macron has pushed on with it. But not without opposition. Opposition from a grassroots level movement of men and women wearing bright yellow vests, usually donned by construction workers. The yellow vests movement broadly stood against economic injustices. But they had some galvanising issues, like the wealth tax. Once in office, Macron repealed the wealth tax and replaced it with a tax on real estate. Big mistake! The wealth tax was hugely popular among the working class in France. And repealing it gave the impression the government was pro-rich. Fuel prices also rose considerably during this period. Thousands took to the streets, but Macron stuck it out. The protests crippled transport networks in major cities like Paris. But the president was unmoved. Today, the movement has largely fizzled out. But that's when Macron dropped his second major reform.

Protests against pension reforms

It's an unsaid rule in French politics - you don't touch pensions. But Macron decided to, anyway. And he's without a doubt burnt his hands. France has an extremely complicated pension system. But here's the gist of what Macron has done. He has decided to unify 42 pensions schemes into a single system based on points. The current scheme is extremely popular. For one, it accounts for the kind of work you do. A more demanding job like that of a train operator will fetch you the same amount of pension at an early age. 

Macron wants to unify France's 42 pension schemes

But under the new system, it's all about the points you accumulate. And you accumulate more points by working for more years. The age of retirement under the new scheme is 62 years. But you get a bonus for working for two more years. Effectively, a person in France will have to work until 64 years to receive a good pension. For a country like France that prides itself on its welfare system, this was too much to take. Workers' unions took to the streets and major cities including Paris were paralysed. 

There is merit in Macron's new plan. Popularity is not a justification for stupidity. Many experts do agree that France's pension plan needed reforms. This new one will benefit people who change professions mid-way. Women will also receive equal pension under this scheme(can't believe they are still contemplating this in 2020). As the government looks to firefight what is the second mass movement in the last few years, the president has gone missing. 

Macron with his firefighter PM Philippe

He has fronted prime minister Edourd Philippe to shore up his government's decision. For anyone unfamiliar with France's political system, the French PM is nowhere near as powerful as the president. Macron's only reaction was an appeal for calm during the holiday season. And when you think about it, that's the kind of guy Macron is. Looking for mediation, where decisiveness counts. And asking for a ceasefire when peoples' life-savings are in question. Not a wise move. 

On the international stage, Macron has become the negotiator-in-chief. From Ukraine to the Sahel, Macron has revealed his taste for foreign policy. And he has been successful. Along with Germany, Macron managed to bring Ukraine and Russia to the table. The summit ultimately led to a high-profile prisoner swap between the two countries. But there is ambiguity on his stance vis-a-vis Europe. Macron opposed the enlargement of the European Union, and effectively killed talks on the possible inclusion of Albania and North Macedonia(cheap shot). Combine this with his scepticism on NATO, and the question is - does Macron want a more closely knit EU that is devoid of U.S influence? An EU that can challenge the global hegemony of the U.S? 

Macron with Germany's Merkel

Macron's love-hate relation with Trump

Don't let his mumbling persona fool you. As I said in the beginning, this man can make some rather courageous moves. One such move was a digital tax on foreign tech companies operating on French soil. The likes of Twitter and Facebook are likely to be the most affected. Trump was furious. He loves Twitter, but not the man who runs it. The same can be said about Facebook. Trump is allowed to hate American tech companies, but no foreign country can even dream about doing that. U.S has retaliated with tariffs on French wine and cheese. You could argue that this is a needless trade war. Especially considering Trump has no clue how tariffs work. 

If you're wondering when the 'unnecessary foreign intervention' is coming...well, we're there. The Sahel, a stretch of land straddling western and central Africa. The countries in this region include Niger, Mali, Mauritiana, Chad, Burkina Faso, Ivory coast, Senegal and a couple of others. France is leading the U.N-mandated anti-terror operation in this region. Under Operation Barkhane, France has deployed close to 4,500 troops in the Sahel. If you're wondering why that's a big issue, take a look at that list of countries once again. Many of them have been French colonies in the past. And sending your troops to the country that you once ruled over illegally is not really a favourable 

message.

Macron with Sahel G5 leaders

To Macron's credit, he has largely stayed away from the politics of the region, and repeatedly denied charges of imperialism. But the move is distasteful due to the sheer optics of it. To be clear, it wasn't Macron who placed troops in the Sahel. That decision was taken before he came to power, back in 2014. But Macron has doubled down on troop deployment. For a foreign affairs-savvy Macron, the situation in the Sahel is exciting. But the problem is, he's nowhere close to winning the war. Militants have been gaining ground recently. France lost 13 soldiers in a helicopter crash in Mali while fighting militants. And Macron's response was to send more troops and American reaper drones. 

Macron with troops in West Africa

Macron is up for re-election in 2022. And despite the wave of protests and his 'hit or miss' diplomacy, Macron is expected to retain the presidency. This is because Macron represents a voice of reason in a world that's veering to the right. Europe too has been caught in this frenzy. Right wing parties are doing well in Germany. And Boris' Britain.....well, fill in the gaps. Macron defeated a hardliner named Marine Le Pen to claim the presidency. The election was literally a no-contest once Macron placed himself at the ideological centre of a country that has been far-left or far-right most times. Macron's centrism was the perfect choice for many who wanted a cocktail. 

At the end of the day, Macron is likable. He looks like an average Joe who rattles out unemotional speeches. But that's exactly who Macron is. A man who basks in how remarkably unremarkable he is. Nothing justifies this image of Macron than the picture of him at the FIFA World Cup. Cheering like a giddy school boy, as his team scored a goal. But maybe that's the balm an embattled and right-leaning Europe needs right now. 

Macron at football match Vs Croatia

Trump drops a New Year bomb in West Asia

You’re sipping a nice margarita during your vacation in Florida. What’s on your mind? Normal people would think about how nice it is to get away from work. Or about the summer that’s headed your away. But not Donald Trump. He was tweeting out a picture of the American flag after having ordered the killing of Qassem Soleimani – the most powerful general in Iran. Just 2 days into 2020, and Trump has given us his Samuel L Jackson moment already. Taking out the commander of Iran’s Quds force is no mean feat. And hand it to Trump for doing it while on vacation.

Iran's spymaster Qassem Soleimani killed

A little after midnight, a group of Shia militants from Iraq’s PMF were escorting ‘special guests’ from the Baghdad airport in their own SUVs. And that’s when 3 U.S rockets hit them near the cargo terminal. Information was coming in at a snail’s pace. The PMF immediately blamed the attack on the U.S. And there was radio silence from the Americans. But as soon as reports of militant casualties emerged, the picture was clear – this was indeed a cold and calculated U.S operation. But it wasn’t until much later that Qassem Soleimani’s name figured in the list of casualties. Surely the Americans wouldn’t take out one of the most powerful men in Iran! Assassinations are by definition, daring. But there would be no coming back from such an escalation. But that’s Donald Trump for you. There was no last-minute calling-off this time around. Not just Soleimani, the deputy commander of the PMF was also killed in the strike. Two top commanders from Iran and Iraq, killed in a single blow.

The U.S military was probably tracking Soleimani for a long time now. He had been making trips to Baghdad regularly, due to the anti-govt protests over the last few months. And taking out a convoy was never going to be a problem for them. But what next? Can the U.S withstand the fallout from such a high-profile killing?

What was left of Soleimani's convoy

Countries were quick to take sides. Needless to say, Syria sided with Iran. They called the U.S act cowardly. Russia too said the strikes would escalate tensions. China called for calm and restraint, the kind it’s showing in the South China sea and Xinjiang. And there was white noise from Britain, France and most American allies. And when they did react, it was with a message of de-escalation. This is not the early 1990s or the 2000s. The power equation has changed. Trump will find it difficult to create a coalition in west Asia this time around. But more than the silence from its allies, it is the active condemnation from Iraq that is likely to irk Trump. The Iraqi PM called it a gross violation of the security arrangement with the U.S. The U.S got away with incisive strikes on sovereign soil during bin Laden and Baghdadi. But those were known terrorists, hiding in unknown locations. Soleimani was no bin Laden. This was a man who headed a legitimate wing of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. Political differences led to the Quds being designated as a terror group. And Soleimani’s designation as a target. But don’t for a moment think that the man was a saint.

pic.twitter.com/VXeKiVzpTf

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 3, 2020

Soleimani was Iran’s spymaster. He pulled the strings from behind, while his Quds force unleashed havoc against American troops. U.S claims that he was behind the death of 17% of all American personnel between 2003 and 2011 in Iraq. So, America definitely had an ax to grind. You could even say a justifiable one. But this puts the entire region on a knife’s edge. Any government worth its salt would respond to such an act. And Iran’s leadership is working overtime to rally the country together. From the Ayatollah to the common man on the streets of Tehran, the message is clear – revenge. But that’s easier said that done. America has an impulsive, trigger-happy president who is fighting an impeachment trial in an election year. Is that the kind of animal Iran wants to spar with? Moreover, the gulf between the two militaries is too wide. A fighting spirit can win you a war, but only in cinemas. In the real world, you would be forced to retreat with your tail behind your legs. So, Iran is unlikely to respond in equal measure. But they could of course prove me wrong and go on an even more adventurous mission. But let’s hope better sense prevails…for everyone’s good.

The flag of General Soleimani in defense of the country's territorial integrity and the fight against terrorism and extremism in the region will be raised, and the path of resistance to US excesses will continue. The great nation of Iran will take revenge for this heinous crime.

— Hassan Rouhani (@HassanRouhani) January 3, 2020

But Iran could hit U.S right where it hurts. At its oil-chugging belly. One snap of its fingers, and the Strait of Hormuz shuts shop. Say goodbye to 30% of world’s oil supply. This threat is real. This threat is practical. And this threat is probably on Hassan Rouhani’s to-do list. Just a couple of days back, Iran, Russia and China were conducting war games near the Gulf of Oman. And it doesn’t take a genius to guess that the Strait of Hormuz was indeed part of the plan.

But on to the more important question- what was Trump thinking? An easy answer would be - he wasn’t. But there is some rationale hidden beneath this outrageous strike. The U.S says they were in possession of intel that led them to believe that Soleimani was planning something big. That’s entirely possible. Especially considering the recent U.S strikes against Kataib Hezbollah and the subsequent storming of the U.S embassy by pro-Iran militias. As evident from this strike, even the U.S was planning ‘something big’. Trump’s military advisers would have briefed him about the risk of going after Soleimani. And if he did go ahead with it, maybe he knew something that isn’t in the public domain yet.

While the U.S action was no-holds barred, its reaction after the strike has been measured. No chest-beating like during Baghdadi. This shows that the U.S realises how sensitive things are right now. Too much posturing would push Iran to do something drastic. That would be a rudderless slide, that both sides will be unable to navigate. For now, the New year could not have started on a more dangerous and febrile note. West Asia has been a conflict zone for as long as I can remember. But something about the current situation, just feels a bit more than a newspaper headline.