Navigation

 
Please note:
You are in the euro|topics archive. For current articles from the European press review, please go to www.eurotopics.net.

Home / Index of Authors


Almeida de, João Marques

was Director of the Portuguese National Defense Institute, from 2004 to 2006, before joining the Cabinet of the President of the European Commission J. M. Barroso in October 2006. He has taught International Relations at the Lusíada University, Lisbon, and at the Portuguese Catholic University. He is also a frequent commentator on world politics in the newspaper, "Diário Económico". João Marques de Almeida is a specialist in International Relations Theory, International and European Security, and Portuguese Foreign Policy. He has published numerous articles in scientific journals. In 2004, he co-authored A Encruzilhada: Portugal entre a Europa e os Estados Unidos. João Marques de Almeida was educated at Lusíada University, and received his M.A. in International Relations from the University of Kent at Canterbury, U.K., and his Ph.D. in International Relations from the London School of Economics.


RSS Subscribe to receive the texts of "Almeida de, João Marques" as RSS feeds


5 articles of this author have been cited in the European Press Review so far.


Diário Económico - Portugal | 01/02/2010

João Marques de Almeida praises European and US help for Haiti

The way the Europeans and Americans have come to the aid of Haiti after the earthquake is very commendable, writes João Marques de Almeida, a member of President of the European Commission José Manuel Barroso's cabinet, writing in the business paper Diário Económico. He adds that Russia and China have been less praiseworthy in their performance: "The aid ... is testimony to the humaneness of the Europeans and Americans. When there have been tragedies of these dimensions in the past, like in Pakistan in 2006 or in Indonesia and Turkey before that, the US and Europe (often alone) were immediately there to help. The majority of financial aid comes from Western countries. Moreover the willingness, swiftness and mobilisation of European and American society show that we are not indifferent to such disasters. ... At a time when there is so much talk of the decline of the Western world, we can be proud of ourselves. And let no one say that there are strategic interests or valuable raw materials in Haiti. ... The world may be multipolar in many respects, ... but as far as humanitarian affairs are concerned it is still led by the Europeans and the US. Where are China and Russia when humanitarian disasters occur? Haiti has proven that in such cases all the world receives from Beijing and Moscow is indifference and aloofness."

Diário Económico - Portugal | 18/05/2009

Swine flu as a source of power

João Marques de Almeida writes in the daily Diário Económico that politicians around the world are using the outbreak of swine flu to consolidate their hold on power: "What we saw in the past weeks was not an 'epidemic', but proof that people believe a global 'epidemic' is unavoidable. ... In addition there were two other worrying signs. Firstly, many political powers all over the world used the 'epidemic' or the 'crisis' to consolidate their own influence. The United Nations and the World Health Organisation immediately established plans for global regulation and intervention. In the 19th century wars were a source of power. In the 21st century this role has been taken over by public health. Secondly we continue to see a strong mood of anti-globalisation. This time the 'epidemic' showed up the dark side of globalisation, which 'threatens' us all. The 'diseases' of globalisation can only be fought with the 'health' of nations, these critics say. This might all sound like a joke, but it's not."

Diário Económico - Portugal | 10/11/2008

João Marques de Almeida on transatlantic relations

"The election of Barack Obama offers a unique chance ... to strengthen transatlantic relations", writes João Marques de Almeida in Diário Económico newspaper: "Although many of the threats faced by the US and many of its interests will remain unchanged, it is mistaken to say that Obama's America will be identical with that of George W. Bush. Obama's election is the expression of America's will to change, but also of the will ... to change the way the rest of the world sees the US. With the election the US has taken a first step in the direction of its allies. Now these allies must take a step towards the US. Many provactions will test transatlantic relations in the months to come. Troublemakers will say that the US will continue to be the US, regardless of who is president. My hope is that those who now say that Obama's America will be different from Bush's will go on thinking that way."

Diário Económico - Portugal | 28/07/2008

A fatal love affair?

João Marques de Almeida, a member of the cabinet of European Commission President José Manuel Barroso and international relations expert, compares in Diário Económico US President George W. Bush's foreign policy approach with that of US presidential candidate for the Democrats Barack Obama: "I cannot resist the temptation to draw comparisons between Bush's foreign policy and the statements of Barack Obama. There are the same warnings for Iran, the same support for Israel, the same goal for Iraq. ... And the same commitment to Afghanistan. But there are differences: Obama calls for Europe to increase its military engagement in Afghanistan - in his words: 'A mission like that of the USA'. Another difference is that everyone says 'no' to Bush and has no trouble doing so. In Germany 200,000 said 'yes' to Obama. Did they have any idea what they were supporting and what awaits us? Or are we heading for a fatal love affair? We will know by the beginning of next summer."

Diário Económico - Portugal | 24/06/2008

The antidemocratic Irish No

The newspaper Diário Economico puts responsibility for the failure of the EU Reform Treaty squarely on the shoulders of national governments: "It was the governments of the respective EU member states that wanted the Treaty. So anyone who is unhappy with it must address their complaints to Europe's 27 capitals. ... Some are also alleging that the Treaty was deliberately made complicated so Europeans would not understand it. ... The Treaty is muddled ... because no holds were barred in including the interests of all member states. ... Many speak about Ireland's democratic decision, forgetting the democratic decisions of the other countries that ratified the Treaty ... just because no referendums were held there. But the legitimacy of the respective parliaments, as representatives of the people, may not be disregarded. ... If the Irish were to determine the future of the Treaty that will influence millions of EU citizens who did not take part in the Irish referendum, it would represent the biggest travesty of democracy since the fall of the Soviet regime."

» Index of Authors


Other content