Skip to main content

1989-2026

 In 1989, the international norms that had held for decades. In the tumultuous autumn of 1989 the various governments of the Warsaw Pact fell in turn. "In Hungary it took six years, in Poland it took six months, In East Germany it took six weeks, in Czechoslovakia six days and in Romania it took six hours". Communism had collapsed under its own contradictions.

As we read the headlines in January 2026, it is hard not to feel certain 1989 vibes. The end of Maduro in Venezuela, and now the explosion of unrest in the "Islamic Republic" of Iran. It is not easy to understand what is going on across the cities of Iran at this point, but one thing is very clear: the regime of the Mullahs is being shaken to its very foundations.  Tired of the casual brutality, corruption and incompetence of the clerical regime, the Iranian people are expressing a clear desire to end the broken system that has governed them for nearly fifty years.

Meanwhile other authoritarian governments, including Russia and possibly even China, are facing new challenges. The terminal illness of Ramzan Kadyrov, the leader of the Chechen Republic inside Russia is a potential source of instability for Putin, as the scale of the disaster that the full scale Russian invasion of Ukraine has unleashed becomes clearer every day.  Far from being feared, the clean overthrow of Maduro is a devastating contrast to the Russian quagmire in Ukraine. Russia demands respect, but it is cashing cheques it cannot honour, and the direction of travel is ever more negative for the brittle and unstable regime in Moscow. Blood curdling threats from drunks like former President Medvedev are shrill and dangerous, but increasingly desperate. Only the nuclear threat now differentiates modern Russia from the Iraq of Saddam Hussein- a military threat on paper, not in reality. A determined NATO will not face an existential threat from Russia for many years, if ever. 

Meanwhile the chaotic disruption of Donald Trump in Washington is facing a level of unpopularity that has never been seen before. Notwithstanding the decisive American intervention in Venezuela, the increasingly brutal ICE agents, by killing a totally innocent mother in Minneapolis are opening a can or worms that could lead to a catastrophic result for the Republicans at the mid terms. The door for the third impeachment for Donald Trump will then open wide.

Then there is China. the rumours of the power struggle at the top of the CCP have grown ever starker, and the government of China is facing significant pushback both internationally and at home. 1989-90, like 2025-6 is a year of the Snake in eastern horoscopes, and the implication is the shedding of a skin.  That is certainly what happened at the end of 1989.  For 2026, we will simply have to see,

Of course also in 1989 was the Tian An Mien square uprising and the subsequent crackdown.  Not all the stories of the year of liberation in Europe were happy ones, so as the new year begins we are town between hope... and fear.

The world is changing and we will see a wholly different set of political realities over the course of the next few months.  It is a new skin, but we still do not know if it will be a healthy or even more dangerous serpent that emerges from the upheaval.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...