In ophthalmic circles, a 20/20 vision describes “normal visual acuity.” In layman’s terms, this implies a clear and sharp vision. While not necessarily denoting perfect vision, this term has found its way into the political lexicon.

It is a term which suits politicians; after all, politicians are not in the business of reaching perfection, but they are expected to offer clear and sharp political visions. It also provided politicians with a target date – 2020 – by which some of these visions had to be realised.

India, Malaysia and Rwanda launched “Vision 2020” programmes; Malaysia hoped to become a self-sufficient industrial nation, India sought to become a developed nation and Rwanda linked this to various development programmes. 2020 became synonymous with realistic political visions to be reached by a specific year.

The results were broadly successful.

Ophthalmic terminology can prove to be rather apt when describing political visions. We can easily detect examples of hyperopia or the inability to solve short-term issues; presbyopia or the inability to focus on specific issues and myopia or the failure to have foresight.

The human eye turns out to be far more similar to the political process than we had first imagined.

The year 2020 will mark the 75th anniversary since the founding of the United Nations. Such anniversaries always offer perfect opportunities for soul-searching. Introspection and analysis are much needed in this case.

While initially intended to prevent future wars and to foster international peace, security and friendship among nations, the organisation turned out to be inept at fulfilling every one of these aims. Nevertheless, this does not make it a pointless organisation. Instead, this anniversary posits the question of how the United Nations can be more effective in the exercise of its duties.

There are several positives; it is an organisation which has the power to bring under one roof the vast majority of sovereign territories in the world, it has a wide range of expertise, and its imprimatur carries with it considerable political clout. Yet its nebulous track record does little justice to its lofty ideals.

2020 is also the year which will begin to bring some closure to the Brexit debate. The 2016 referendum result was decisive, yet that result was widely contested by the political class. Theresa May’s decision to go for an early election in 2017 prolonged the agony. Parliament’s inability to decide on the Brexit policy to be pursued by the United Kingdom led to the resignation of May and the election of Boris Johnson as prime minister.

His mandate was confirmed with an overwhelming outright majority in the closing weeks of December 2019. Thus, Britain is set to leave the European Union on January 31, 2020. It is an outcome which respects the verdict of two electoral tests.

2020 will be a defining year in Malta too

Yet the fractures in British politics show no signs of healing. Jeremy Corbyn remains the leader of the Labour Party as it undergoes a “period of reflection”. This party is in a state of denial as droves of traditional Labour voters in its Northern heartlands abandoned the party for the Conservatives. Some sought to blame the electoral system for the result – conveniently forgetting that the electorate voted overwhelmingly against a reform of the electoral system in a referendum held in 2011.

Johnson, though widely derided in some circles, brings a new and fresh tempo to British politics. Slightly eccentric and always optimistic, he heralds a new form of one-nation Toryism; more socially aware and fiercely patriotic. The next year will be a test for him and his brand of politics.

US President Donald Trump will face a test of sorts in the upcoming Presidential election scheduled for November 3. Trump is campaigning for re-election amid impeachment hearings and accusations of foreign intervention in the US political process. This will probably turn an already nasty contest into an even more unpleasant noxious race.

President Trump is not known for fighting a clean fight. His election led to a change in the tone of the presidency. His profligate use of Twitter and his erratic behaviour have done little to get an international audience to warm to his persona.

Yet that international audience matters very little in the November election. So far, there are too many unknown factors to be able to discern a possible outcome. For starters, the nominee of the Democratic Party – Trump’s main challenger – is yet to be chosen.

The Democratic primary is set to be one of the largest ever. The leading contenders for the nomination include former Vice-President Joe Biden, the former mayor of New York Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of South Bend Pete Buttigieg, and Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

Sanders and Warren would allow Trump to label the Democratic nominee as a far-left hard socialist.

He will have a tougher time taking that line with centrists like Biden, Bloomberg and Buttigieg.

Buttigieg, whose father was born in Malta, is undoubtedly the rising star of this contest. A graduate of Harvard and Oxford, this former Afghanistan veteran is a fresh centrist face in the political game. While he faces an uphill struggle, he is likely to have a promising future in US politics.

2020 will be a defining year in Malta too. In the opening weeks of the year, Malta will have a new prime minister. He will have an uphill struggle in reigniting trust in institutions. He will need to take seriously the demands of protestors who want accountability and justice.

Of course, he may choose to ignore the protests, but he does so at his peril. Doing so will mean that he forfeits the claim to govern on behalf and in the name of the entire country. Mere words are no longer an option.

The way the European Union reacts to the unfolding political crisis in Malta will likely impact its credibility. Objectively speaking, there is very little it can do beyond monitoring the situation. Nonetheless, it is a crisis which has the potential to test its fundamental values which include respect for human dignity and human rights, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law. It may prove to be a defining test for Ursula von der Leyen’s Commission.

Each of these three issues touches upon questions of vision: the testing of visions and the possible re-defining of visions. Ultimately, it will prove that vision cannot be bound by deadlines. Rather, it is something which should be underpinned by principle and allowed to evolve organically.

André DeBattista is an independent researcher in politics and international relations.