Johnson announces NATO Sec. Gen. Candidacy
Johnson announces NATO Sec. Gen. Candidacy
Johnson's anticipated candidacy has got tongues wagging and many people shaking their heads in a rejection of his candidacy.
The French Dispatch is a reader-supported publication. If you enjoy reading this, like, subscribe, share it with your friends and colleagues, and consider taking a paid subscription.
After months of speculation, it appears that the cat is out of the bag and that former Prime Minister Boris Johnson has let slip that he is running for the position of NATO Secretary General.
The incumbent Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, was initially supposed to end his tenure last year. Still, due to the ongoing war, the alliance decided to extend his term until 30 September 2023, on which date he would personally like to leave.
This means that, while there was a pause in the negotiations due to the Russian invasion, these began once again began late last year with the need to find to figure out who exactly would take his position and who would benefit the most from this.
In an interview with the Ukrainian publication Ukrainian Pravda, Boris Johnson had this to say:
“Heading NATO? That's a great idea. You know, it is a very good idea. I want to emphasise, dear friends, that I have this idea, and let no one forget that there is a candidate for NATO Secretary General on the line. This time, I think I will be lucky”
Having discussed this with European leaders, the banal Brexiteer was annoyed at former Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi, who he claims suggested that the next Secretary-General should be a representative of the European Union.
"I completely disagree with him. I think that there are other candidates outside the European Union. It should not be the EU after all. I, of course, consider myself as a candidate. This is a good and important position,"
So what do I need to know about the process?
To begin with, we’re talking about one of the least transparent “elections” to be called an election, with the decision being taken after a consensus between the most powerful nations of the alliance and with four countries having a powerful influence over the process: the United States, Germany, France and the UK.
With this being a consensus vote, everybody has to get together and agree, which is why we should look at national positions here.
There’s a good chance that France and Germany do not present their own candidates for this process. Their considerably more diplomatically focused positions throughout the war have not won them any friends, so they will focus on supporting another candidate rather than courting more controversy.
As the Americans do not contend for the position due to their control over the top military post of the alliance, the supreme commander of Europe, the Secretary General has always been a European, even if the Americans have a decisive vote.
So out of the ‘big four’, that only leaves the United Kingdom, which is always looking for ways to flex its muscles, prove its credentials, and influence a post-Brexit Europe.
As the Scandinavian bloc has now had both Anders Fogh Rasmussen and Jens Stoltenberg consecutively, they’re unlikely to get another crack at the position.
This leaves the Benelux, Baltic and Southern and Eastern European countries to present candidates or potentially even Canada.
Remember to take part in our Reader Questionnaire!
Who are the frontrunners?
Honestly, has yet to be a real consensus over who will replace Jens Stoltenberg with the discussions ongoing throughout the war. However, a few things need to be kept in mind.
There have been a lot of discussions regarding the fact that, after almost 74 years, it’s probably time for NATO to appoint a female Secretary General, especially with all of the strong candidates for the post in Eastern Europe.
Three names frequently appeared in 2021: former presidents Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović of Croatia, Dalia Grybauskaitė of Lithuania, and Kersti Kaljulaid of Estonia.
Since then, we’ve had more big names being put forward: Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin, Estonian President Kaja Kallas, and Canadian Deputy Prime Minister, Chrystia Freeland, have frequently been named due to their strong stances on Russia.
However, there are some caveats.
Sanna Marin’s candidacy depends entirely on the results of the 2023 Finnish Parliamentary elections in April this year and whether or not she is re-elected as Prime Minister.
Chrystia Freeland has seen questions raised about her family history, with newspapers reporting that her grandfather was a member of the Ukrainian nationalist movement and that he edited a publication titled Krakivski Visti, which was used as Nazi propaganda and was highly antisemitic.
This would be considered problematic considering the nature of Russian propaganda and its claims against Ukraine. However, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau expelled four Russian diplomats for attacking her Freeland and attempting to tarnish her public image.
For Kaja Kallas, there will be concerns that her outspoken nature could rub certain member states the wrong way and cause internal clashes and friction if she rejected any attempts at backchanneling by states such as France, Italy or Turkey.
Many would also expect her to take on Secretary General’s unifying role and be more moderate in her political declaration. However, this may be an overblown concern.
Aside from these three, several big names have been sneaking around recently, most notably Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, who has been looking for a way out of his post for a while now, and Former Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi.
Both would come from influential EU member states and bring much experience in international affairs to the role. They would also bring the expertise of wrangling difficult coalitions back home, which would help settle internal discord.
But can they gather the support?
But What about Boris Johnson?
With Boris Johnson reading this and getting bored as he asks himself why I’m not speaking about him enough, the time has come to satisfy his needs.
Firstly, you want to read up on the sheer enormity of scandals that eventually brought Boris Johnson down and ended his Prime Ministership. In that case, you can read the dispatch that covered the very chaos that was the Ignominious end of Boris Johnson.
Supporting accused sexual assailants and threatening to kneecap journalists aside, there are several reasons why Boris Johnson could and could not make it work.
First of all, the good points.
Boris Johnson is a well-known politician internationally. For better or for worse, he has been around the international community for long enough to develop a strong presence.
He also had experience working with NATO in his short stint as Foreign Secretary.
Not only this, but due to his support for Ukraine, and regardless of the timings for said support for government killing scandals of his, he has developed a strong position as a man who “stood up to Putin” and supported Eastern Europe against the invader while France and Germany were selling everybody to the Chinese or something.
I’ve covered the “we’ve betrayed Europe” conspiracy too many times. It’s nonsense, and I have plenty in the archives showing it. But it helps Boris Johnson portray himself as a real unifier and the defender of the NATO alliance.
Now, for the bad.
Boris Johnson is known for having a big mouth and associating with some unsavoury characters, most notably former KGB officer Alexander Lebedev and his son, Evgeny Lebedev, which led to what was called a breach of national security.
After a 2018 NATO meeting, which he left clutching documents, he quickly shook off his 24/7 security detail, flew to Italy alone, and then met former KGB lieutenant-colonel Alexander Lebedev, a spy stationed in London in the 1980s and who worked with Vladimir Putin.
There are no records of this meeting, so nobody says what was said, and the only note we have of this is Boris Johnson acknowledging to MPs that the meeting breached all protocols.
Boris Johnson also suppressed a report on Russian interference, completed by the intelligence and security committee, because it looked unfavourably on Brexit and on his own political behaviours and fortunes.
There is a long-term pattern of dangerous, opportunistic behaviour that the other NATO leaders will not have forgotten, particularly his odd endangerment of National Security and loose, Trumpesque relationship with the truth.
So good luck to Boris Johnson. For the best interest of the NATO alliance to prevail, he has to fail.
Thank you for reading the French Dispatch! If you liked what you read, you should like this post and subscribe to the newsletter by clicking/tapping the button below:
And if you’d like to contribute a coffee or two to help fuel my coverage of the wild world of politics, feel free to click on the picture below:
I had just been wondering about the process of deciding who gets to be the next Secretary General of NATO and whether Johnson would be supported by anyone other than himself, so your analysis is timely and apposite as ever. But as a translator I can’t help asking a nitpicky question about language: what do you mean by “the deer of the NATO alliance”?
It is notable that Boris is angling for it now, but there was speculation from some quarters not so long ago that Ben Wallace, Defence Sec. and a longstanding ally of Johnson, was considered a potential UK candidate. I suspect Wallace and Sunak would both support Johnson taking the job as it ensures his exit from parliament while maintaining the British position on NATO support - give as much as possible to ensure Ukraine can defend itself.
Johnson's bombast might however prove more of a liability than the concerns about his associations with the Lebedevs - he may be able to engage people, but if he is seen to test the partnership, then he might find himself in trouble. The more measured PMs Rutte, Kallas and Marin are all better at managing tone, with the latter two having spoken very well about the war. Of those two, only Kallas leads a country actually in NATO - I would consider her to be the likely competition to Johnson, if Sunak backs him.