Executive Summary:
It is no secret that right-wing commanders with their nationalistic, exclusionary and populist rhetoric have monopolised the global sphere and are well on the way to implementing their blueprint. Boris Johnson continued the current when he became Prime Minister of the United Kingdom in July 2019. However, he finds himself politically paralysed and with no room for manoeuvre. But it appears a problem several right-wing populist leaders are compounded by. The polarising and vicious environment they prompt via the explosive language they utilise are of their most productive tools. Whilst effective in garnering support to get them elected, these very tendencies are proving to be profound hindrances.As Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel faces indictment, the prospect of being impeached increments for Donald Trump in the United States and Johnson is cornered in his quest to deliver Brexit, it is indeed deeply divided landscapes that are aggravating matters for the respective leaders.
Analysis:
Boris Johnson won himself the Prime Ministerial title, one he has yearned for his entire political career, as Theresa May cut her term short, when it became clear there was no way out of the Brexit impasse.
He won the Conservative leadership elections emphatically with his robust no-deal pledge, winning 92,153 votes and 66.4% of the vote share. It is perhaps of little surprise that as the party is swept along by the populist surge, the master of slanderous and virulent rhetoric heads it. From likening Muslim women who wear the burqa to ‘letterboxes’ and’ bank robbers’, to calling British people from the Commonwealth ‘flag-waving picanninies with’ watermelon smiles’, he has historically not held back with his chaotic and divisive language. But for a Conservative Party becoming increasingly unconservative, it precipitates the support he requires.
On Brexit, his approach is no different. ‘I would rather die in a ditch’ was his answer when questioned on whether he will extend the October 31st Brexit deadline. In an interview with TalkRadio during the Conservative leadership elections, he slammed May’s ‘pathetic’ time in office, whilst also insisting that Brexit will undoubtedly happen in the autumn. ‘ Do or die. Come what way ‘ was how he expressed it.
To many Brexiteers, the desire for Johnson to deliver Brexit at any cost is etched on his face. Observers suggest there is an authenticity about him which seduces those in the Brexit camp. One of the original faces of the Vote Leave campaign and an alleged lifelong Euroeskpetic, who instinctively felt May’s deal was a surrender act and was of the pioneers who hindered its progress. In fact, of May’s withdrawal agreement, he dismissed it as ‘defunct’ and proclaimed it would leave Britain as a ‘vassal state’ of the European Union.
Ostensibly, the notion of compromise is non-existent in the current climate, certainly not under Johnson’s premiership. Rather Johnson is engaging in a strategic effort to whip up anger in the country, and suggestions are it is having the desired effects. This was illustrated when Brendan O’Neill, an ardent Brexiteer and commentator, appeared on the BBC’s Politics Live show, talking about the Supreme Court ruling on the suspension of parliament, and what the reaction of Brexiteers should be. He challenged why riots have not yet erupted, before doggedly asserting that ‘there should be’ .
Indeed, Johnson has portrayed himself as a Brexit purist, a Brexit martyr even. From meddling judges, to obstructive parliamentarians to intransigent Europeans, everyone is allegedly insistent on preventing the honouring of the will of the people. This pits Brexiteers against the rest of society and sets up the terrain for Johnson’s populist ‘people v parliament’ general election.
In fact, Johnson recently struck a deal with the EU, as he declared the end of the problematic backstop arrangement which was the sticking point previously. Under the new arrangement, agreed upon during a Brussels summit on the 17th and 18th of October, the UK would leave the EU and almost entirely cut its existing trade and customs relationships with the bloc. However, Northern Ireland would retain closer customs links with the EU to prevent the need for a hard border with the Irish Republic.
However, his deal and any attempt to fast-track it through parliament to honour his October 31st pledge was blocked after MP’s voted against it.
Palpably, there is a lack of consensus and unanimity regarding Britain’s departure, which is particularly conspicuous in Britain. The Brexit vote has driven a sharp wedge across the British landscape and since his arrival into Downing Street, Johnson has contributed, and sharpened those divisions.
In complicating an already divided arena and promising to hurtle into the abyss, Johnson has prompted the impossible, by uniting the opposition parties against him. They have lacked a consensus from the outset, but managed to combine to produce the Benn Act – legislation that forces the government to ask for an extension to the Brexit deadline if a deal is not agreed on by the 19th of October. Incidentally, sticking with his inflammatory theme, Johnson referred to the act as a ‘surrender bill’ .
Simultaneously, with the opposition parties insistent on thwarting a catastrophic Brexit, this has only deepened the tendencies of the Conservative right. There appears no space left in the party for moderate or level headed members. This was evident when Johnson appointed his new cabinet, in what was considered a ‘brutal reshuffle’ as he picked likeminded Brexiteers and axed any detractors in a bid to showcase his boldness. The plight was best encapsulated when after 21 Conservatives engaged in a backbench rebellion and helped defeat his no-deal policy, they had their whips withdrawn. They included seven former cabinet members and the grandson of Winston Churchill.
Correspondingly, with populism becoming entrenched in British politics, it is the type of terrain that allows new insurgent and renegade parties to flourish. Enter Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party. Formed officially in April 2019 to run in the European Parliament elections as a protest act to Britain still being a member of the EU, and fighting on a strictly no-deal campaign, it amassed sizeable support, winning 32% of the vote in Britain, announcing itself on the British political scene, and commencing its journey as the thorn in Johnson’s side.
In fact, following Johnson’s letter to the EU requesting an extension, departing on the 31st was removed from the equation, but his repeated insistence that he will deliver has made the matter a vote-moving issue. An indication of how this benefits Farage was evident when a recent poll conducted by ComRes showed when respondents were challenged on their voting intentions if the deadline to leave has been extended beyond the 31st , the Conservatives who have been comfortably polling in the high 30’s for the last month, fell to second place on 27%, but significantly the Brexit Party rose to 20% in third place.
To exacerbate matters for Johnson, Farage recently announced his party will be standing against the Conservatives as they field more than 600 candidates, with fears in the Conservative camp that it could split the Brexit vote.
Effectively, Johnson is left backed into a corner with a backlash inevitable regardless of the path he opts for, as his textbook populist demeanour and the deep divide he is exploiting prove his biggest barriers to progress.
Across the Atlantic, Trump has been employing a similar alienating strategy since his arrival into the White House. The latest in a string of incidents comes as Trump ripped into Somali American lawmaker Ilhan Omar, during a rally in her own district in October. He denounced her as an ‘America-hating socialist’, before labelling her a ‘disgrace to the country’ and a ‘fraud’, and finishing off by crudely vowing to prevent Somali refugees coming into the country.
It is this kind of destructive rhetoric that has too often been associated with the President. From promising to build a wall along the border between Mexico and the US, to barring asylum claims, to calling for a ‘complete and total shutdown of Muslims entering the United States’ , or sending apocalyptic warnings about the ‘invasion’ of criminals from the southern border, incendiary and populist sentiments have been ever present during his premiership. His quest to unite the population against minority groups in the hope of securing support for his ‘Make America Great Again’ pledge is unmistakable. But like Johnson, it can also be a political own goal.
Allegations have surfaced that Trump pressured the leader of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden who is vying for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination. The endeavour is seen as an attempt to discredit Biden, depict him as an incongruous candidate, turn the country against him and wreck his reputation in a typical divide and conquer Trumpian approach. But adopting this method has landed Trump in hot water, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ordered a formal impeachment inquiry of the US president.
In fact, the House of Representatives recently approved a resolution to formalise the procedure of the inquiry, marking a significant step in the ongoing investigation and setting the next phase, as the pressure on the president intensifies.
The theme continues with Netanyahu too. The Israeli leader, now the longest serving prime minister has often found winning elections an effortless exercise. But after two elections this year, one in April and one in September, both of which he has failed to win enough seats to cobble together a coalition, he finds himself deadlocked. Even though Israeli President Reuven Rivlin threw Netanyahu a lifeline by tasking him with forming a coalition, over rival Benny Gantz, the stalemate held and Netanyahu was hit with yet another obstacle. The writing seems to be on the wall, as the political baton has now been passed to Gantz who will now try to form a government.But the country is stuck in limbo and Israel appears to be headed for an unprecedented third election, and with Netanyahu’s appeal waning, observers predict her era may well be approaching its conclusion.
Netanyahu has often been the specialist in prejudicial and injurious narratives which win him elections. In 2015, he infamously declared ‘Arab voters are heading to the polling station in droves’ , intended as a warning and rallying cry to counter the alleged danger the right wing government was in because of them. He opted for the same strategy this year when on Election Day, his official Facebook page said ‘Arabs want to annihilate us all – women, children and men’ .
But this time, it had the reverse effect. ‘Netanyahu was our best campaigner’ proclaimed Arab politicians and voters , as Arab voter turnout jumped from a record low of 49% in April to a record high of 59% in September.
It is indeed the cornerstone of populism – creating internal enemies, demonising and vilifying them to cling on to power. It is with that objective in mind that Netanyahu allegedly promoted regulation worth hundreds of millions of dollars to Israel’s Bezeq telecom company. In return, Bezeq’s popular news site, Walla, provided favourable coverage of Netanyahu and his family. In fact, former journalists at the Walla news site have attested to being pressured to refrain from negative reporting of Netanyahu.
This has come to light after two of his formerly closest allies are testifying against him, in one of many charges levelled at Netanyahu, as a major corruption case looms , if he no longer holds the position of prime minister. So Netanyahu joins the list of populist leaders now scrambling for a political lifeline.
Conclusion:
Three leaders in different regions of the world who epitomise the populist surge. They have dispersed divisive and demagogic expressions with the hope of pitting society against certain groups or factions, to bolster their own positions and portray themselves as the solution to the urgent problems. By attempting to nullify the opposition, they have galvanised their rivals and used unconstitutional and improper practises, ergo putting their positions in jeopardy. In 12 months, Boris Johnson, Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump, who share the same worldview and operate on the same wavelength may well find themselves dislodged. And the factors that contributed? The very tools that put them into office.