IMUN Logo

Mobile Toggle

Interview with the Keynote Speaker: Insights from Pedro Delgado Alves on Democracy, Youth, and Global Citizenship

Interview with the Keynote Speaker: Insights from Pedro Delgado Alves on Democracy, Youth, and Global Citizenship
Sofia G.

This year, the Press team had the honor of interviewing IMUN’s keynote speaker, Mr. Pedro Delgado Alves. A Portuguese academic, parliamentary deputy, and the head of numerous political associations. Representing the Socialist party, Mr. Alves is known for his work in constitutional law, and his contributions in legislative reforms particularly in areas related to transparency, animal rights, and civil rights.

What are your thoughts on IMUN?

Model United Nations conferences, from what I have seen and learned today, are some of the most interesting formats for fostering dialogue, debate, and critical thinking skills in youth. It also successfully increases access to and understanding of international relations affairs, especially in the way that we both focus on current affairs as well as look back at historic resolutions from the past; it is a very interesting exercise in that sense. As a member of Portuguese parliament, we run programs similar to this, so I can see that IMUN is a very successful program. This is apparent in the amazing number of schools and students that participate.

How were you involved in politics/debate as a young person?

I became a member of the Young European Socialists relatively young, at 16 years old, but even before that I made my way into local politics just by trying to help situations in my neighborhood. Even though I couldn’t participate in local government at this age, I still campaigned for issues important to me in the ways that I could. At the University of Lisbon, I ran for the Student Union and was also a member of the student representative bodies. What initially sparked my interest in public service was simply the environment in which I raised – my family. It is almost a family tradition to be active in the community, as my father ran for the local council and was an active trade unionist. Though my early day's politics were because of my family, the rest of my journey, I would say, had entirely to do with my resolve and my passion for public service.  

Is there one specific cause or social issue you are most passionate about?

It’s hard to choose one specific thing, I did many things in my years...

One of the things that I cared about greatly earlier on in my career, that I still follow today, is abortion rights. That was quite impactful. It was one of my first important campaigns in 2007, and today, there are still unsolved issues to be addressed. The change leading up to the 2007 abortion referendum was major and took many years, as Portugal’s more traditional values left it lagging behind the rest of Europe on this issue. Yet, the battle is never over. I continue to engage professionally in this issue because, as I quote Obama, “you should never take it for granted”. I have also been working on issues of transparency recently, actively lobbying and working on regulations, which I believe are important for democracy to be able to survive and stay accountable towards its citizens. It may not be as interesting as something like abortion rights, but sometimes it is the least interesting things that turn out to be in fact the most. I also have been at the forefront of animal rights in Portugal, which is an issue that still needs a great deal of work in this country.

You’ve worn many hats—researcher, educator, political leader, and TV debater. What do you think was the key to your success in your field, how were you able to do so much so young?

I would not say that I did so much so young, but I do think that out of all the things I did and all the offices I held, one of the most important ones was being president of the local council, in Junta de Frueguesia. This, getting real-word experience as a leader and public servant, is what I would say is the key to understanding good leadership. As the President of Local Council, you can fix problems at high proximity to the citizens - there is no intermediary, instead you are the person they go to with their issues and are the person who must fix it. You must do one of the most difficult things in politics: connecting with people, finding common ground, and trying to find a balanced solution. As you get older, this connection is a skill you either make perfect or lose the ability to do entirely. I believe we are losing the ability to talk to one another and prioritize empathy. We can disagree at the end; we can start and end the debate with both sides not having moved an inch; we can still disagree with the same passion as at the beginning, but as long as there has been a productive conversation where we use empathy to understand the other side, and understand why the others have a different position, it will have been worth it. That is why democracy is so important: because you have a platform where you can do this. You can try to convince others for the better, you can try to reach a consensus and a compromise and if not, life goes on. In any case, that is the skill that I perfected when I was the local council president and I believe was very important in my career. You mentioned TV debates as well – yes, I used to participate in them often – and though they do have a dimension that is performative, the actual purpose is to provide viewers with better understanding of the topics and information. Many people sometimes approach these debates as small battles, where you have to “defeat” the other side or come out with the trophy, but it does not necessarily have to be that way. Debates should be about if each side can recognize and come out of the conversation being able to acknowledge that the other has a point. That’s something that competitive debaters are less able to do, as the point of competitive debates is simply to win. But this is just an exercise, just as MUN is an exercise, and their true purpose is to help you practice using the tools that would lead to solving real-world issues in the future, such as negotiating, advocating, and collaborating. 

What are your proudest accomplishments over your career?

What I liked most were the years where I was local council president, meaning I led the council of the Lumiar neighborhood in Lisbon. Though it was only a small parish council, I believe we were able to change the lives of many residents, which was extremely fulfilling for me. I led many social programs that did things such as creating incentives for reading in children or solving housing problems. These types of programs do enter the statistics, but behind these statistics are the sense of family, and real work being done. Before I was in local government, a lot of people that were in it would tell me that it was the most amazing thing they’ve ever done, and I never really believed them until I became part of it myself and understood how rewarding it feels.

What advice would you give to young people wanting to follow your path into politics?

The first thing is to be informed. If you are informed about issues in the world, you are sure to face one moment in your life when you could have made a difference in the decision-making process of this issue, and if at this time in your life you feel like you should help further by having a life in public service, embrace it. This is a learning experience on its own. The opportunity to change something. As a leader, you can approach your position from a bureaucratic approach, thinking “I’m just here to manage things”, but the truth is that to be a good leader you have to do more than just manage, you have to take the next step. An analogy I like to use for this is that of a waste disposal truck. Some leaders might just acknowledge that waste disposal needs to happen and make sure it gets done. A true leader, however, would go much further than that: they would create a waste management policy that is environmentally sustainable, reflect on what is powering the truck, evaluate where you deposit the waste, see if there is a way to convert it into more energy, and more. These are questions that every level of management can ask, because there is a possibility for change everywhere. Not because change on its own is necessarily the goal but because you have to make sure you adapt to our circumstances that are constantly changing. It is inevitable that reality will change, therefore institutions and how they function should also change. You should approach public service with this in mind, that is my advice. Don’t be afraid of change, of thinking out of the box, and of doing more than you think you must to for your people.

Building on to this idea of adaptation, the focus of your research is Constitutional Law - how do you think traditional constitutional principles can adapt to apply to 21st-century issues like misinformation online, the dangers of AI, bodily autonomy, and the rise of political extremism?

The thing about principles, even constitutional principles is that they have the advantage of being able to adapt to circumstances. Not to get too into political theory here, but there is a German author of politics that divides norms into rules and principles. Principles are guidelines, and can adapt to circumstances because they annunciate the core values that you need to protect. Because of this, we don’t really need major changes in principles as time passes. We do, however, need to update the rules, which are the ways these principles are enforced in certain areas. For example, we don’t need to change the generally accepted broad definitions and ethics guidelines such as definitions of hate crimes, free and fair elections versus biased elections, and personal freedoms. What we do need to change is what rules are used to enforce these ideals, such as updating regulatory frameworks on digital platforms to counter misinformation and changing privacy laws to protect bodily autonomy.

You have quite a useful perspective in relation to this conference as a whole, because you’ve seen and you’re part of what goes on in this country’s national government, how it works.  In regarding to large coalitions like the UN or the EU, what do you think makes Portugal special, what can it bring to the table in global politics?

Portugal has a special set of circumstances that makes its position quite unique. Portugal is a small country, so we tend to be off the radar in most diplomatic forums. However, this is not the case. Portuguese foreign policy usually has three pillars: our membership in the EU, which connects us to other European nations and causes us to tend to have common positions with our European allies and friends; the Community of Portuguese-Speaking Countries (the CPLP), which brings us in contact with other geo-strategic areas where a small country like ours from Europe would not even play a role; and our transatlantic relation to the US, which has always been quite strong as a result of our geographic Atlantic position and connections throughout history. These three facts put us into three different trades where we’re able to gain influence. Also, we’re a country that does not have many conflicts with other nations because we are very small, and this makes it easier for us to act as mediators and to build bridges between other countries. This makes us, in a sense, a “fluffy”, meaning friendly, nation. The consequences of this become apparent when you look at the number of Portuguese citizens who hold offices at the international level, such as the current UN Secretary General António Guterres, as well as when you look at how frequently and recently Portugal gets elected to the Security Council. Overall, we’re a country that has a good diplomatic service and has a tradition of being able to build bridges – this is even more remarkable considering that until 1974, we were essentially a pariah at the international stage, what with the Colonial Wars and our dictatorship. It was only the relatively recent large-scale democratic transformation in our country that has made us a nation that has a seat at the table, is able to mediate, and can navigate the troubled waters of international politics.

 

As chair of the Portuguese-German Parliamentary Friendship Group, what do you believe are the most pressing issues facing EU unity today?

 One of the biggest shocks the EU faced and is still recovering from was Brexit. It shook things around and may have woken some of the EU leaders up to the needs of finding faster and clearer solutions to common European problems. The EU has been working on improving and adapting for every obstacle we can face. Because we had to deal with a major sovereign debt crisis of Portugal, Greece, Ireland and more in the last decade, when we had to react to the pandemic we learned from the lessons if the debt crisis and used them to improve our process. For example, we lacked solidarity between nations in the debt crisis, so when we had the pandemic, the EU made sure to have a common approach and common answers for issues that could only be solved at that level. That is an improvement. Right now, the EU faces two common challenges as well as their first (almost direct) involvement in an international conflict. The first common challenge we are still discussing a very traditional one, which is whether we should enlarge the EU and risk overstretching, or we should deepen integration first and then think of enlargement. Currently, the decision has been taken, which is that the EU has to enlarge in order to extend its democratic shield to other nations. At the same time, Europe also has difficult domestic problems, such as the second challenge of populist and extremist movements. There have been several illiberal democracies popping up in several member states, as well as EU leaders that are aligned to less democratic positions and have some proximity to authoritarian solutions instead. This brings a whole new set of problems within the EU, both in the council where governments are represented and in European Parliament, where right now the far-right has become the third largest group in the European Parliament. These are the major challenges that the EU faces: the traditional problem of EU integration, these external challenges of major conflicts, and now obviously populism within its ranks.

 

Within Europe, how should the EU respond to populist and nationalist movements gaining traction across the continent?

I believe that we just need to have direct, effective answers to citizen’s perceptions of problems or to their actual problems. It has a great deal to do with the fact that many citizens feel that they are in a worse position than their parents were - that the new generations feel that they have less opportunities, lower wages, and are scared about climate change, so there is a great degree of dissatisfaction. This, naturally, should be our priority. Of course this is not easy to fix, because resources are scarce and we cannot send expenditures massively, but we have to balance it out. In the end, if a nation has balanced budgets but at the cost of losing citizens to populism, it ends up having a larger problem. I believe the EU should have a greater concern with actual policy that affects people’s lives. It should work on adopting measures that many countries have adopted individually to protect the democratic institutions from outside interference, from election manipulation, and from attempts to disturb the way the media remains free, independent, and impartial. It is clear that we must support initiatives to tackle these problems at both the national and EU level.

With populism and polarization affecting democracies worldwide and knowing your extensive experience in debate, how do you recommend political systems promote constructive debate without letting polarizing voices dominate the conversation?

 Something very important that I have learned in the past few years since we’ve had a populist party in parliament, is that you should never change your attitude, or emulate the attitude of the populists. You should never become aggressive like they are, though it is true that sometimes this is very hard to avoid. I have been in parliament for 12 years, and it is only recently, in 2022, when we’ve had a significant populist parliamentary group, that I have realized that the way that they debate or set the tone is always aggressive and rarely constructive. If you don’t make an effort to restrain or cool down the house, it is frequent that everyone is shouting at a certain point. It is true that this is just a question of style more than substance, but it’s more relevant than it seems, because it can strongly affect the way that the population feels about parliament. This is not to say it is easy to do, however, because many times members cannot resist the escalation of debates. Extremist parties tend to be provocative with the goal that we will react with the same energy, because their point is to make democratic institutions lose their reputation and discredit them. That is something you should really resist.

 

You are obviously value education, as a former student, now a doctoral candidate, and an educator yourself. Could you give us some insight into what you think is the importance of education or community awareness about the global issues we face, in raising the next generations and improving our world?

In terms of education for youth, I can see that MUNs are really powerful ways to give students the tools they need to face the challenges of the present as well as those for critical thinking, which is the most important education we can provide. Though it is not necessarily a traditional approach to education, which focuses more on facts, knowledge, and memorization, it is much more relevant to develop critical thinking processes and be able to navigate information. Knowing is know how to look for information, how to research it, how to distinguish what is good information, what should be critically appraised, and what is disinformation, I think those are the most important things I think education should give you. As a teacher, for example, for me it’s not too important that my students know by heart, for example, which article of the Constitution mentions what separation of powers is - instead I find it much more important that they know what separation of powers is in the first place, and that they can critically analyze or evaluate something and determine that it is a violation of the separation of powers. Education should be oriented into giving people the tools for them to navigate through the world. In this way, MUN let you not only learn about the UN but simulate the UN, giving you the valuable practical dimension to it. It is an important starter. It is so fortunate that in Portugal we see more and more programs like IMUN here, as those are important for better understanding how the system works and for demystifying it, showing people that really anyone can and should participate.