“Nobody in the world today has intellectual and moral credibility”

Amin Maalouf (Beirut, 1949) believes that humanity “is today going through the most dangerous period in its history.” There is a lack of moral authority and leadership that the Franco-Lebanese intellectual and academic writer laments. He analyzes this in ‘The Labyrinth of the Lost: The West and Its Adversaries’ (Alianza). He believes that we are “returning to the Cold War”, he worries that “the danger of another world confrontation is being downplayed” and he considers it “encouraging” that the Palestinian state has been recognized.

-Today, no one listens to intellectuals like in the 20th century.

-Nobody in the world today has moral credibility. Neither the great powers, nor the religious authorities, nor the intellectuals. Nobody has true intellectual authority. That is a reality.

-Are we living another turbulent moment with a serious threat to world peace?

-That’s right, unfortunately. This is considered more in Europe. We believed that armed conflicts were over from European history. And there is a war going on in Ukraine. This is disturbing. The journey of history is not a straight movement towards peace, democracy and prosperity. There are moments of regression and collapse, and this gives a lot to think about.

-The war in Palestine, is that another big threat?

-And very serious. It is no less surprising than Ukraine. Violence in the Middle East is long-standing and is now escalating. It has never seen a period of true peace. Both wars pose a serious threat to international relations. We are entering a new era of turmoil that resembles another Cold War.

-Recognising the Palestinian state, as Spain, Ireland and Norway have done, is that good news?

-There should have been two states long ago. Much suffering could have been avoided. Today things are more complicated. It is encouraging to work in that direction, although I am not at all optimistic. I do not believe that this represents progress towards any immediate solution, although setting an objective by believing that there should be two states is an essential principle.

-Are we on the brink of a nuclear and irreversible Third World War?

-I would not say irreversible. Nuclear arsenals have existed since the 1950s. They have grown over these decades and so it was thought that war was inevitable. What is disturbing is that the risk of conflict is talked about over and over again and trivialized in people’s minds. It is trivialized. It was thought that there would be no nuclear war and that Russia would not stop taking that risk. People do not seem to be aware of the seriousness of the threat. Those who remember Hiroshima know the nuclear horror. But that apocalyptic image is not in the minds of new generations. They are not immunized and Hiroshima means nothing to them. But I do not think we are on the eve of a second world war.

-Polarization is increasing, the world is tilting to the right and the left is not stopping it. What is happening?

-The end of the Cold War changed the political climate in the world. We moved from ideological divisions to identity conflicts. It is a fact that a certain nationalist right feels more comfortable in an identity-based environment than the left. Symbolic countries for the left, such as Sweden, are swinging to the right. It is surprising that a fairly hard right-winger rules in the motherland of social democracy. The same applies to Italy and its long left-wing tradition.

-With the collapse of the United States. Who will fill his role?

-It is clear that the United States cannot assume its role as the only superpower in the world. It is also true that there is no alternative. No one can assume that. There is a kind of lack of leadership in the world. China dreams of assuming it, but cannot. Neither does Russia. And Europe does not provide itself with the necessary means. We will not see the rise of any new power. We must bet on a new international order, a new form of world government in which many countries cooperate to solve the great challenges of humanity.

-Putin is a destabilizing force. A tragedy for democracy?

-A great tragedy. It would have been better to support Gorbachev’s changes. He promised a different Russia, integrated into the international system. Unfortunately, at the crucial moment the United States and other countries preferred to bet on Yeltsin, a kind of liquidator who handed power to Putin. You can’t rewrite history, but the wrong decisions were made at the crucial moment.

-Will Trump return to the White House?

-It’s a real possibility. We won’t know until the last moment. The elections will be very close. It will be very disturbing for Europe. Someone like Trump will join hands with Putin behind Europe’s back very easily. It’s a real risk. I wouldn’t hesitate to do it. He will go to Russia as well as North Korea.

-Will we stop killing each other in the name of God?

-“What would you like God to say to you when you die?” Bernard Pivot, the great French cultural journalist who died recently, asked me in a questionnaire on his program. I answered, “To hear from God that he is innocent of all the crimes committed in his name.”