When the sun comes up, the darkness gets bright. We see this nightmare almost constantly. Crises leave a dull que that appears in nightmares that carry throughout the day. People often feel that they are thirsty and run down, with no water to drink, and no one to help but onlookers in despair. Many countries are looking to save themselves from this crisis while slight problems surface daily in the most developed countries. Perhaps the world is getting closer to realizing this dream.
A few months ago, alarming news of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine spread through official news agencies. Many people in the Middle East and Africa were watching this great crisis with concern for their own states. A crisis that may be a terrible spark for much bigger crises such as hunger and war over available resources was not on their mind at first. For example, while the Egyptian government has said it has wheat reserves for the next four months only, the Egyptian people are wondering what to need to do next. The dread of an imminent nuclear war may satisfy a small population in these countries. The last resort is unwelcomed by any means. Without help from developed countries, these hungry and frustrated people may never be able to cope. They do not have an airplane to board, nor hope to even hang on to its wheels. An example of what happened to desperate Afghans fleeing the situation is a statement that appears in the minds of many.
At this point, how important are the people of the Middle East and Africa to developed countries? Many of these people are now drowning in a sea of despair and fear of hunger and war. Many of these people have had the chance to immigrate to developed countries. And the large population in the form of the refugee crisis has caused a new crisis in the world called the refugee crisis. And many cannot even leave their families and go to sea. They break down every day for fear of a worse future. War needs to full-stop and humanity crisis donations need to surface. Wasted money on ammunition for what?
Perhaps a decade ago, the emigration of a person from these countries was accompanied by a small farewell party. There was still hope for improvement. And many were hoping to start small businesses in these countries. But now dreams may seem farther away than ever. Many people in these countries are being deprived of their most basic rights every day. Even having the right to breathe clean air is occasionally gone with the dust crisis that has hit the Middle East and Africa more than ever.
The feeling of betrayal and the unjust distribution of wealth and resources have erased the remnants of hope and aspiration. This frustration is growing. And the broad bureaucratic structures are incapable of solving the current problems and the dire consequences of the Ukraine war crisis, of which hunger is perhaps the most important consequence for the Middle East and Africa. And people are ignored in silence. Focusing on the deprived and harmed is a natural process but not focusing on those being afflicted by the war in Ukraine is worse. Play by play each day we see the news. Yet, what good does this do for the starving and devastated bystanders of this war?
The people of the Middle East and Africa are drowning in fear of the future. More developed countries with smarter policies could help the Middle East and Africa battle the super-challenge of climate change and hungry. Through smarter and more targeted collaborations, especially in the area of climate change crisis, with the Middle Eastern and African universities and educational and scientific assistance to these universities, the Middle East and Africa could highly improve. This improvement may place a smile on the hungry people affected by the Ukraine war. Thus, selling military ammunition, war and even sanctions should be replaced by scientific collaborations and diplomacy. And this even won’t let the next migration crisis be created.
The recent visit of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi to Riyadh in March 2022 and meetings with the Saudi King and other authorities placed Egypt and Saudi Arabia’s relationship back into focus because of their issues and challenges. Egypt and Saudi Arabia’s official and media rhetoric refers to âIranian, Turkish, and Yemeni threatsâ to the region’s security, stability, sovereignty, and interests.
Saudi Arabia supported Egypt’s independence and the withdrawal of British forces when they signed a treaty of friendship in 1926. A Defense Agreement was formed and signed between the two countries in 1955. Saudi Arabia backed Egypt during the 1956 aggression. During the October 1973 battle Saudi Arabia provided Egypt’s forces in Sinai with oil support.
Historical Background
After the United States reneged on its pledge to build the High Dam, Saudi Arabia stepped in to support Egypt with a gift of $100 million on August 27, 1956. Until the October 1973 conflict, Saudi Arabia supported Egypt by suspending oil supplies to the United States and Israel in support of Egypt. Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz also visited a trench in Egypt. Saudi Arabia severed diplomatic ties with Egypt on April 23, 1979, following the signing of the Camp David Accords. Former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Saudi King Fahd bin Abdulaziz resumed diplomatic ties in 1987 after decades of estrangement.
Saudi Arabia stood by Hosni Mubarak after the revolution in Egypt on January 25, 2011. Mubarak received a phone call from Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz, who offered his support and condemned the demonstrations. He also lauded the army’s role in the orderly transition of power following Mubarak’s departure, although ties were tense.
Saudi Arabia supported the alternative administration in Egypt prior to Abdel Fattah al-Sisi’s rise to power and shortly after President Mohamed Morsi‘s downfall. To help Egypt, Saudi Arabia sent an estimated $4 billion worth of monetary and in-kind assistance, as well as $2 billion in Central Bank deposits and perhaps an equal number of oil-related commodities.
Egypt-Gulf Cooperation
Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates provided Egypt with almost $12 billion in loans, grants, and petroleum after the overthrow of Muslim Brotherhood President Mohamed Morsi in early July 2013. With regard to the Gulf states’ financial support for Sisi, Sisi talked openly about his desire for $10 billion in payments from Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and UAE. He also talked about the logistics of transferring the money to Egypt’s army accounts.
Saudi-led âDecisive Stormâ military action in March 2015 was supported by Egypt. When Saudi Arabia announced the formation of a 34-country Islamic military alliance to combat terrorism on December 14, 2014, Egypt backed the Kingdom’s military strategy. However, Egypt provided only its assistance in the form of political and media backing, with no involvement on the ground.
A âpeople revoltâ against Bashar al-Assad began in March 2011. In response, the regime’s supporters, including Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah, launched an armed conflict with the Arab and Western-backed opposition groups. âWe will not remove Bashar from power,â Sisi declared. Syrian revolution is a âsovereign matterâ according to Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry, who also said Egypt supports a peaceful resolution. Egyptian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ahmed Abu Zeid noted that each sovereign country has its own measurements and assessments and makes decisions based on its own viewpoint.
Increasing Egyptian-Saudi Coordination Post-Arab Spring
Saudi Arabia was relieved by the ousting of the Muslim Brotherhood and the imprisonment of late Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, who died in prison, during the Sisi era, which began in mid-2014. Due to Egypt’s new regime’s need for large and urgent doses of support to stop Egypt’s deterioration on all sides, the Egyptian regime and the monarchy in Saudi Arabia has become closer in a dramatic way. This historic opportunity presented itself to Saudi Arabia to correct the course of its relationship with Egypt and to reactivate it, so that it could avoid previous mistakes, one of which was Saudi Arabia’s bet on Mubarak’s steadfastness without providing strong and tangible support to him during the popular uprising.
Since the populist upheavals in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, and Yemen began in late 2010, Saudi Arabia has expressed alarm about the expansion of these movements to the Gulf states. Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Gulf states managed to keep âArab Springâ repercussions under control through emergency economic, social, and financial policies and measures that eased internal conditions at the same time as boosting support for Arab regimes that resemble the Saudi regime, especially in terms of their association with US political, military, and economic interests.
During the Sisi era visits and unbroken contacts between officials of the two countries have increased to strengthen and support their relations in various fields during this period. The two countries’ relationship is characterized by a high level of coordination and open communication in order to address regional concerns, crises, risks, and challenges. As a starting point, all regional intervention in Arab countries’ affairs is considered as a threat to Arab independence, sovereignty, and national unity, regardless of their source.
Egyptian-Saudi Cooperation in the Light of Regional Changes
High-level contacts between Egyptian and Saudi officials have grown since Sisi’s election as Egypt’s president in 2014. A number of summits or Arab or inter-Arab encounters have taken place between Egyptian President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi and Saudi Arabian leaders. With the tripling of Saudi financial help to Egypt’s administration, these reciprocal trips have solidified Egyptian-Saudi cooperation in a variety of industries; as a result of Iran’s âinterventionâ in Arab affairs and the necessity of a collective Arab reaction to Iran and its allies in the region and the importance of collaboration in combating terrorist groups in the region.
With the escalation of the so-called âstrategicâ Iranian threat to security in the region and the Gulf states in recent years, Egypt and Saudi Arabia have seen a remarkable development on several levels in their relationship. This is due in part to Iran’s growing military and economic capabilities, or the gains made by the axis led by Iran in the Middle East. Egypt and Saudi Arabia’s âstrategicâ relationship changed somewhat during the course of three years, but the consequences were significant. While condemning terrorism, both Saudi Arabia and Egypt focused on Egyptian backing for the Saudi Arabian campaign against Ansar Allah in Yemen and Saudi support for Egypt’s military campaign against takfiri groups in Sinai.
During high-level visits in 2020 and 2021, these concerns were revealed. At the time, Saudi Arabia expanded its financial and investment support to Egypt in exchange for Egypt’s political support of the Kingdom’s fight against âIranian expansionâ through its friends in the Middle East.
Several reports indicated that Egypt and Saudi Arabia have made significant progress in their economic, commercial, tourism, and health ties during the past two years. The Israeli attacks on the Palestinian people and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, meantime, were also condemned by Egypt and Saudi Arabia at the same time.
After the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and its implications on global and regional security and stability, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi visited Riyadh on March 8, 2022, to discuss these issues. The recent Egyptian-Saudi summit, according to former assistant foreign minister Hamdi Saleh, sought a cohesive vision to face the hard circumstances around the world. âThere is no clarity of vision following the Russian-Ukrainian conflict,â he said.
Osama Naqli, Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to Egypt, is certain that the visit would yield beneficial results. More than 70 government agencies and institutions from both countries have signed a variety of agreements, memorandums of understanding, or protocol agreements, giving this relationship a strategic dimension that enhances the goals of joint cooperation between the concerned authorities in the two countries institutionally, he said. Saudi Arabia is the second-largest foreign investor in Egypt’s government and business sectors.
According to Gamal Aboul Fotouh, the Egyptian Senate’s Under-Secretary for Irrigation & Agriculture, the Egyptian-Saudi relations are long-standing and extend into the political and economic realms, with the total trade volume of 8.3 billion dollars between Egypt and Saudi Arabia during the first eleven months of this year, while the Egyptian exports to Saudi Arabia totalled about 2 billion dollars.
Egyptian-Saudi relations were tense, but not hostile, under Sisi and King Salman bin Abdulaziz‘s rule, due to shared interests, challenges, and political visions, particularly in relation to the so-called Iranian threat and the political axis. In the wake of Egypt voting in favour of two different Security Council resolutions, one aimed at stopping the bloodshed in Aleppo but opposed by Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, ties between Riyadh and Cairo became unusually tense (on October 8, 2016). Saudi Arabia was furious by Egypt’s backing for the Russian decision, which it viewed as anti-Arab.
Al-Sisi has acknowledged that other countries exert pressure on Egypt. To him, âWe will only kneel to God,â he stated at a military training conference. His country’s approach on Syria is autonomous, and he highlighted the importance of finding a political solution. He denied that the suspension of Saudi oil shipments to Egypt had anything to do with Egypt’s vote at the UN Security Council.
As the late Saudi journalist and writer Jamal Khashoggi put it, âI tend to think Saudi Arabia likes Egypt and would want to retain a good relationship with it.â Egyptians’ perceptions of the dangers to Arab national security are at the heart of the matter. âThe Egyptians tried to remain neutralâ according to Khashoggi. However, neutrality is unacceptable to Saudi Arabia. Even though Egypt does not explicitly back the regimes of Syria and Russia, it indirectly does so. Khashoggi went on to say that âthe conflict’s premise is Iran’s win in Syria.â If Egypt adopts a more cooperative stance with Saudi Arabia, these differences will disappear.
Recent Developments in the Egyptian-Saudi Relations
After Egypt’s military overthrew President Mohamed Morsi in a bloodless coup in 2013, relations between Egypt and Qatar have been tense ever since. On the eve of cutting diplomatic ties with Doha on June 5, 2017, Al-Sisi said that the return to the previous situation would not lead to a significant change in Egyptian-Qatari relations. Resumption of aviation traffic and âlimitedâ diplomatic representation between the two countries are the maximum measures that can be done. In fact, many government economists and others close to Sisi predict that Egypt’s investment losses would be exacerbated as a result of the rift, especially since Saudi, Emirati, and Kuwaiti capital have not joined the Egyptian market as planned five years ago.
Due to a decrease in funding and a lack of implementation of numerous projects and files agreed upon during King Salman’s and Crown Prince’s visits to Egypt in April 2016, Egypt and Saudi Arabia face a number of issues, most notably at the economic level. Mohammed bin Salman made the announcement in March of this year. Saudi-funded development projects in Sinai have been put on hold, according to reliable sources.
King Salman Bridge, which was part of a package of projects agreed upon by Egypt and Saudi Arabia in 2016 when they ceded Tiran and Sanafir to Saudi Arabia, has been stalled for two years at the point of comparison between two projects: first, the bridge is based on Tiran Island, and second, the bridge is extended on multiple stages between Ras Sheikh Hamid and Nabq. Egypt and Saudi Arabia also had issues with the renewal of the agreement to supply crude oil from Aramco, given the new contracts Egypt signed with Iraq to avoid a repeat of Saudi Arabia’s supply suspension, which occurred during Egypt’s judicial and parliamentary complications in the period of maritime border demarcation agreement implementation.
When Egypt and Saudi Arabia agreed to a maritime border delimitation deal in April 2016, Egyptians were outraged and the matter was taken to court, which cooled relations between the two countries for months. Egypt’s claim to Tiran and Sanafir originates from the 1906 boundary demarcation agreement, according to lawyers who oppose the deal.
The Egyptian government prioritized âimportingâ money from abroad in any manner and from any available source during the Sisi era in order to improve the poor economic and social conditions in Egypt. It was predicted that Egypt’s new leadership would gravitate toward Saudi Arabia, which is monetarily the richest Arab country, and cultivate ties with it at various levels, as well as âsellâ it positions supporting its policies toward Yemen, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.
Egypt and Saudi Arabia have established a strong and long-lasting relationship despite their differing views on regional and international issues and some of its foundations being vulnerable. There’s the pillar of money (or petrodollars), which frequently upsets the equilibrium that should exist between states, particularly between Arab and Islamic countries. Economic, commercial, and cultural ties between Egypt and Saudi Arabia have become stronger as a result of their shared strategic objectives and geographical proximity. King Salman Bridge is expected to deliver economic benefits to Egypt and Saudi Arabia, according to officials.
As a result of these disparities, Egypt and Saudi Arabia have very different views and policies on a number of regional and international issues, including as the conflict in Syria, the Saudi-Yemeni war and the conflict in Libya, as well as Iran and Russia’s involvement in the region. However, these differences did not lead to a rift between the two, notably during the reign of Sisi. The 2013 military coup in Egypt resulted in the country losing much of its regional clout and strategic location. Economic hardship, near-total reliance on foreign aid and subsidies, as well as a decline in its political standing are all major roadblocks to its claim to regional leadership, leaving it open to pressure from Saudi Arabia or any other party holding up a card.
Saudi-Egyptian relations were exacerbated by the military participation of Syria and Russia. Russian policies in Syria and connections between Iran and Russia were a concern to Saudi Arabia. As Tehran’s most important international backer, Moscow provided military backing for the Assad regime in Syria, and was Tehran’s guarantor for the nuclear accord.
The tumultuous global oil market over the last two years is a source of friction between the United States and Russia. As part of the struggle over quotas and prices, Saudi Arabia is wary of Russian and Iranian attempts to impose limitations on it. Egyptian diplomacy has moved closer to the Russian position since the July 2013 coup in Syria, restricting its focus to terrorism. Cairo, on the other hand, paid no attention to the crisis between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which was expected to resolved by Assad’s ouster. It is seen acceptable by the Sisi regime to maintain the old regime if Assad survives.
Egypt’s âvery pragmaticâ policy toward the Saudi regime, which aims to attract Gulf funds and investments into Egypt, especially at a time of financial affluence in the Kingdom and Saudi openness to Western countries in the economy, politics, culture, and the arts, also condones Saudi Arabia’s clumsy policies toward Lebanon, Syria, Libya, Sudan, and the Gaza Strip (up to most African and Asian countries). As a result of shared values and interests, Egypt and Saudi Arabia have a strong connection. It is necessary to coordinate efforts across various fields in order to protect the national security and economic interests of Arab countries, and to reorient the enormous capabilities of Arab peoples and countries in their natural historical direction, with full cooperation with neighbouring or distant countries.
About the author:
Dr. Mohamad Zreik
Dr. Mohamad Zreik has PhD of International Relations, he is independent researcher, his area of research interest is related to Chinese Foreign Policy, Belt and Road Initiative, Middle Eastern Studies, China-Arab relations. Author has numerous studies published in high ranked journals and international newspapers.
Noted French chemist, Louis Pasteur, best known for his work on vaccines and pioneering Pasteurization process, famously remarked after Napoleonic wars that âscience and peace will triumph over ignorance and war.â Pasteurâs belief in the ability of science to provide answers and building bridges of peace between nations is historically shared by many. Similar claims have supported the development of the contemporary science diplomacy discourse. The scientific values of âtransparencyâ and âuniversalityâ have been a driving force in furthering trust and development between nation states.
The continuing scourge of wars, including Russiaâs recent invasion of Ukraine, nevertheless, casts a shadow over Pasteurâs eternal hope that humanity will someday leave deadly wars behind and dwell in peaceful co-existence. Especially the war in Ukraine has proved that Europeâs post-Cold War science diplomacy has failed. Facing Putinâs military one-upmanship and abuse of international law, western nations have been quick to make science a tool of political sanctions.
Following the launch of Russiaâs special military operations on February 24th, many leading European scientific agencies decided to cancel or put joint projects on hold. The European Space Agency (ESA) cancelled the prestigious Luna 25, 26 and 27 moon missions that were in cooperation with the Russian agency, Roscosmos. The European Commission declared a wide range of sanctions, including the end of Horizon Europe funding to the Russian institutions. Their aim has been to punish and isolate Moscow from major scientific and technological innovations.
Short of severing all the ties and scientific contacts, the policymakers in Europe also expressed the need to keep some scientific channels of communication open to bring an early end to the conflict. While sanctioning Kremlin, the scientific community across the North Atlantic region has been unequivocal in its support of individual Russian students and scientists working in the Western institutions and in extending solidarity to their counterparts in Russia opposing Putinâs aggression. Nevertheless, scientific sanctions to punish nations that endanger international peace and stability through their actions, have been part of Western statecraft for much of modern history.
The Afghanistan War turned out to be a high-stake ideological contest. It forced the U.S. to impose stringent scientific and economic sanctions on the USSR. It was the time that the National Science Foundation and the U.S. National Academy cancelled many ongoing programmes with their Soviet counterparts. The U.S. State Department too joined hands in refusing visas to Soviet scientists. The reason was to coerce the Soviet Union to withdraw its forces from Afghanistan. In the early 1980s, the Reagan administration imposed additional science and technology sanctions to the Soviet Union as a response to the Polish Government of Gen. Wojciech Jaruzelskiâs declaration of martial law.
Interestingly enough, to Under Secretary of State in the Kennedy and Johnson Administrations, sanctions actually constituted an âastonishing ignorance of past experienceâ and was highly inefficient. To its usual political tactics, the U.S. imposed stringent scientific sanctions on countries like India, Pakistan, Iran, and North Korea for violating the global non-proliferation nuclear order. Following the May 1998 nuclear explosions in South Asia, the United States banned the export of lab materials and equipment to these countries and put travel restrictions on their scientists.
Despite high hopes, scientific sanctions had limited influence in settling political conflicts. Often, they had opposite results. Throughout the 1980s the Soviet Union strengthened its aggressive imperialist policies and made technological choices that disengaged them from the west. Ineffective or not, science diplomacy in the form of scientific sanctions has been a part and parcel of western statecraft throughout the Cold War.
The promise of science diplomacy in the Post-Cold War era
The end of Cold War ushered in new phase of global science diplomacy. Marked by Americaâs post-Cold War unipolar phase, it stood on two dominant exigencies. First, science emerged as a vital engagement tool for West in its post-Cold War global outreach. Resolving differences and forging new political coalitions worldwide have been the key aims for those who promoted global science diplomacy advocacy throughout the past two decades. For example, leading Anglo-American institutions, such as the American Association of Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the Royal Society in the U.K. have been trying to build trust and international cooperation based on the supposedly âuniversalâ and ârationalâ character of science.
Second, science diplomacy assumed immense significance in the wake of promoting Europeâs research and innovation competitiveness across the Afro-Asian regions. Securing new markets in the emerging economies of these nations became Europeâs main concern. Creating new markets, technologies, and solutions significantly overlapped with innovation diplomacy. This meant new ideas for building new research partnerships and harnessing various emerging technologies. With the end of the Cold-war bipolar rivalry, the rising global attention to the crisis of global commons necessitated deepening international cooperation through a global evidence-based policy approach.
The international scientific collaborations forged in the wake of addressing transnational challenges such as HIV-AIDS, Ebola epidemic, ozone depletion, melting of glaciers, and biodiversity losses. These symbolized the coming together of the world for solving common global challenges and building the bridges of peace and prosperity. The success of various science diplomacy initiatives with countries of the Middle East, Africa, China, and Russia, corroborated the liberal-internationalist premise of scientific ties. The emergence of science and innovation elites as peacemakers was a truly unique feature in this international diplomacy. It offered a mechanism to manage political differences and compelled policymakers to put knowledge above narrow sectarian differences.
The spiral of great power competition, however, continue to hover over science diplomacyâs liberal-internationalist premise. The emergence of a stronger Sino-Russian alliance in the past decade seeks to counter NATOâs centrality in Europe. Similarly, the democratic governance in West faces serious threat from rising authoritarian ideologies, anti-science campaigns, fake-news, and external interference in elections. As a result, the European Commission as a whole and but also individual member states have been recalibrating their science diplomacy strategies and the nature and extent of its global scientific collaborations. Germanyâs 2020 science diplomacy strategy paper, for instance, explicitly outlined the need to put science in service of promoting âdemocratic actionsâ and supporting the members of the scientific community facing persecution under authoritarian regimes. The growing realism in EUâs global scientific collaborations is also evident from its adoption of stringent regulations to screen investment proposals especially from countries like China.
Emerging Outlook for E.U.âs Science Diplomacy
With Russiaâs invasion of Ukraine, the European science diplomacy stands at a crossroads facing the inextricable Janus face of sanctions and scientific cooperation. Science diplomacy has indeed both a coercive and collegial side corresponding to times of war and peace. The balance between the two is particularly stark as European policymakers feel uneasy to re-position science diplomacy in their foreign relations and statecraft.
The liberal internationalist premise of science diplomacy, which became dominant in the post-Cold war years, also faces serious scrutiny. Science diplomacy practitioners have been drawing serious flak for exaggerating the value of scientific collaborationsâ while overlooking hierarchies and wranglings within the science and academe. The conceptual churning is going to influence the future trajectories of science diplomacy. In this context, it is worthwhile to reflect on emerging concerns and priorities for EUâs science diplomacy programmes.
On the one hand, many European leaders view scientific sanctions as a much-needed political instrument. But it remains to be seen whether the sanctions will force Putin to return to the negotiating table. It is also best not to lose sight of its attendant risks. The traditional carrot and stick approach to scientific collaborations have run its course in todayâs globalized world. Crises like economic slowdowns, pandemics, and climate change prove the claim.
Amidst such occurrences, sanctions demand a more reasoned and calibrated approach than witnessed. The European sanctions against joint scientific projects with Russia dealing with climate change in the Arctic appear rather misplaced and may prove counterproductive. Similarly, what seems as a shortage of high-tech military equipment and the successful disruption of the Russian military supply chain, results to the use of less accurate weapons, and thus, more civilian casualties. Besides, there are concerns that diplomatic isolation might prompt Putin to escalate the war and turn nuclear.
On the other hand, the war in Ukraine forces E.U.âs policymakers to become more conscious and clearer of scienceâs political power. On a global level, concerns over Europeâs technological sovereignty have rendered EUâs scientific collaborations more restrictive. The need to promote scientific cooperation to address global challenges and the openness of science are seriously undermined by the necessity to protect strategic research. Maintaining Europeâs technical edge and sovereignty over the US and China, is forcing the E.U. to engage with countries such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and India is evident of this shift.
In sum, E.U.âs science diplomacy strategies face a tightrope walk as they seek to balance a set of conflicting priorities. The value of scientific collaborations in serving public goods hardly needs reiteration. However, the Ukraine war constricts the space for European governments to foster such partnerships. The mantle of science diplomacy today is likely to rest more heavily on the shoulders of individual scientists, autonomous institutions, and non-state actors.
The challenge for these actors in promoting intentional peace and cooperation is onerous. Yet, their value in furthering dialogue and collaboration is of immense value, as seen historically. In turn, it only corroborates the Louis Pasteurâs abiding hope that âScience and Peace will (eventually) triumph over Ignorance and War…â
About the authors:
Prof. Dr. Maria Rentetzi
Prof. Dr. Maria Rentetzi is professor and chair of Science, Technology and Gender Studies at Friedrich-Alexander-UniversitĂ€t Erlangen-NĂŒrnberg (FAU).
As a recipient of an ERC consolidator grant, she is leading the development of âThe Diplomatic Studies of Science,â a highly interdisciplinary field of research at the intersection of science and technology studies, history of science, and international affairs.
Dr Kapil Patil
Dr Kapil Patil is Postdoctoral Fellow with Chair of Science, Technology, and Gender Studies.
His research focusses at the intersection of science, technology and innovation policy, international relations, and diplomatic studies.
By Dr. Mirzatillo Tillabaev, First Deputy Director, National Human Rights Center of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Doctor of Law
States in many parts of the world regularly amend constitutions, and in some cases draft completely new constitutions. This may be due to various political, economic, social or other reasons. The national constitution of a country is the framing legal document, which captures the basis of the social contract between the state and the people it is supposed to serve.
Whatever the reason, one of the key elements of any constitutional reform is to ensure that human rights and fundamental freedoms are promoted, respected and protected. Constitutional guarantees of human rights across the spectrum of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, and the mandating of courts and national human rights institutions to protect those rights, are vital steps in promoting a human rights culture.
The United Nations notes that âconstitution making is a sovereign national process and that, to be successful, the process must be country-led and driven. There is no âone-size-fits-allâ constitutional model or process and that national authorship should include the participation of state structures, political parties, civil society and the general public.â
The need for broad participation in the constitution-making process is also noted in article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Therefore, a constitution has the highest degree of political and legal legitimacy if it is the result of popular participation.
The process of preparing proposals (more than 62 thousand), the work of the Constitutional Commission, as well as the nationwide discussion of the draft Constitutional Law clearly show the importance of broad public participation, civil society institutions in this process.
The constitutional reform of Uzbekistan is aimed at implementing the priority principle “In the name of the honor and dignity of man.” Moreover, human dignity is the provision of a peaceful and safe life, fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens, the gradual creation of decent living conditions and modern infrastructure, qualified medical care, quality education, social protection and a healthy ecological environment for every inhabitant of the country.
The following priority areas for constitutional reforms in the field of human rights protection and the human dimension have been identified:
The first is to change the previously existing paradigm “state – society – person” to a new one: “person – society – state”, fixing it in constitutional legislation and constitutional practice.
The second is the constitutional consolidation of the role and status of civil society institutions, the principle âSociety is the initiator of reformsâ.
The third is to increase the effectiveness of the current system of human rights protection, reliable protection of the rights of persons with disabilities, women, children, and youth.
Uzbekistan has ratified, and thereby committed itself to comply with, seven of the nine main existing international human rights treaties, namely: the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
In addition, as an OSCE participating State, Uzbekistan is committed to fulfilling core OSCE commitments in the human dimension, including commitments in the areas of pluralistic democracy, the rule of law and democratic institutions; the independence of the judiciary; independent national human rights institutions; fulfillment of international obligations; protection from arbitrary arrest or detention; the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; the right to a fair trial and effective remedies; tolerance and non-discrimination; gender equality and other areas.
All these documents served as the basis for the improvement and preparation of the draft Constitutional Law.
First of all, it should be noted that the draft Constitutional Law includes a number of new positive changes that are not in the current Constitution. In general, despite the fact that the draft Law provides for changes more than 60 articles and 6 new articles, of these, changes to 28 articles and all 6 new articles relate to human rights and the human dimension.
For the first time at the constitutional level, the principle of international law is fixed – respect for human rights and freedoms (Article 17).
Title II of the Constitution contains a list of human rights and fundamental freedoms, to which several new provisions have been added.
The proposed project significantly strengthens the guarantees of human and civil rights and freedoms:
1. In the Republic of Uzbekistan, the death penalty is prohibited (Article 24), thereby implementing the provisions of the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;
2. At the constitutional level, the institution of “habeas corpus” is guaranteed, i.e. arrest, detention and detention or other restriction of freedom is allowed only by a court decision, until a court decision a person cannot be detained for a period of more than 48 hours (Article 25);
3. The presumption of innocence becomes a constitutional principle, i.e. all doubts about guilt, if the possibilities are exhausted eliminate them, must be resolved in favor of the suspect, the accused or the defendant. Also, doubts arising from the application of the law must be resolved in favor of the suspect, accused or defendant (Article 26);
4. The “Miranda Rules” also receive constitutional status (Article 26), in particular:
– the rights and grounds for his detention must be explained to a person during detention in a language that he understands;
– a suspect, accused or defendant is not required to prove his innocence and may at any time exercise the right to remain silent;
5. A new article is introduced stating that every person has the right to compensation for harm caused by illegal actions or inaction of state bodies or their officials (Article 26-1);
6. New rights are guaranteed in the field of ICT, in particular, everyone has the right to access the worldwide information network Internet and use it freely, the state guarantees the protection of personal data (Article 29);
7. For the first time, environmental rights are fixed, everyone has the right to a healthy and favorable environment, reliable information about its condition and compensation for damage caused to his health or property by an environmental offense (Article 40-1);
8. For the first time, the Constitution guarantees the right to appeal to national and international human rights institutions (art. 44);
9. At the constitutional level, the institution of a constitutional complaint is fixed, i.e. the right of citizens to apply to the Constitutional Court (Article 109);
10. The institution pro bone, free legal aid (art. 116) receives constitutional status.
Article 27 of the Constitution contains a narrow definition of the right to protection of personal and family life, since this right is limited to âpersonal and family secretsâ and a narrow interpretation of the inviolability of âhomeâ. The proposed changes are complemented by âthe right to the protection of personal dataâ, as well as âeveryone has the right to the inviolability of the home. Deprivation of dwelling is not allowed, except by a court decision.
In addition, article 28 of the Constitution provides for the right to freedom of movement and residence in the territory of Uzbekistan. The draft proposes to consolidate the right to travel outside the country, as well as unimpeded return to one’s own country, enshrined in paragraphs. 2 and 4 of Article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and paragraph 20 of the 1989 OSCE Vienna Document
The draft Constitutional Law also enshrines the principle of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child âthe best interests of children must always be taken into account in all decisions concerning themâ. Based on this, changes are proposed to Art. 37, 64 and 65 of the Constitution.
At the constitutional level, the principle of the UN Sustainable Development Goals âLeave no one behindâ is enshrined, in particular, the state creates equal conditions for the realization of the rights and legitimate interests of persons with disabilities (Article 39).
Thus, many of the innovations contain changes aimed at implementing international obligations, recommendations of international bodies (UN Special Rapporteurs, OSCE) and raising the norms enshrined in individual laws to the constitutional status. The changes were developed after an open and free public discussion, which ensured broad public participation and meaningful discussions.
Transparency, openness and inclusiveness, as well as broad public discussion, are the main requirements of the democratic process of developing constitutional proposals in Uzbekistan. Compliance with these requirements allows us to note that the constitutional reform is positively perceived by society as a whole, and expresses the will of the entire people of Uzbekistan.
From an early age Ayuna Asalkhanova had a passion for fashion. She knew that one day she wanted to own her own business. ALIDA, her newly launched fashion brand, was born out of the realisation that the pandemic would forever change the way we look at our wardrobe. The budding designer grew up in different parts of Russia, China, Spain and Germany but she spent her teenage, and formative years in Brussels.
Ayuna enjoyed an upbringing where science and education was central, but unfortunately where creativity wasnât really encouraged. Everytime she brought up her desire to work in the fashion industry, she was met with the same sentence; âFashion is a businessâ. This stuck with her and essentially influenced her future choices in life. After she graduated from high school in Brussels she scored herself an internship at Chanel. She went on to study Economics at Solvay Brussels School of Economics and Digital Business Management at IE Business School in Madrid.
ALIDA- Haute Couture
Like many of us, 2020 was a year of reflection for Ayuna. She quickly realised there was a gap in the market when it comes to versatile garments. To find a piece of clothing that works as loungewear as well as for a night now (albeit with the right accessoires) is near to impossible. The fashion industry is an ever-innovating one. The brick-and-mortar approach is outdated and the market has moved almost primarily online for up and comers. Traditional stores and boutiques are using more and more social media as a channel to sell the garments. The digital age has been truly brought upon the fashion industry, and is here to stay. After thoroughly analysing the market it became quite clear that putting everything together, the vision she had for her own brand, was spot-on. Innovation is key, but Ayuna decided to stay true to her own vision, hence why production was kept local and why the pieces are so easy to style to oneâs personal taste.
The brandâs moniker is derived from Ayunaâs own name and the name of her beloved grandmother. Her grandmother Lydia, a Medical Doctor & Professor of Oncology, instilled in her granddaughter a love for sourcing noble materials. She taught her granddaughter that to dress well is to elevate oneâs experience on a daily basis. This was the main inspiration for the brand; sharing with other women the feeling of intimate luxury without compromising on quality. Putting no time to waste, Ayuna started sketching her designs by hand. One palazzo trousers and a kimono later, and Alida was born.
ALIDA
ALIDA is entirely handcrafted in Belgium. The choice to produce in Belgium was not a particular hard one. The countryâs long standing tradition in the textile industry is well-known. Thanks to its impeccable reputation, Belgium has attracted a lot of attention for their local fashion scene that emerged in the 20th century (e.g. the Antwerp Five). This resulted into a thriving place to create haute couture. This is where ALIDA fits in perfectly. Haute Couture is ingrained in our brand DNA.
ALIDA combines a strong aesthetic identity with high-end production values and artisanal manufacturing, inviting the person wearing our garments to experience the finest of custom high-end luxury, whilst exuding a refreshing, modern spirit. The timeless design of our sets ensures longevity, these are intergenerational garments to be worn and loved forever. Production takes place entirely in Belgium. Our production was carefully chosen for their reputation within the Belgian fashion industry. These exceptional local artisans work with Belgian Royal Court Suppliers, international fashion brands and celebrated designers like NATAN, Carine Gilson and Jean-Paul Lespagnard to name a few.
ALIDA- Haute Couture
All the designs are hand-drawn by Ayuna who knows every seam and pattern by heart. We pride ourselves in our production houseâs craftsmanship. The pieces produced are limited in stock and are made-to-order to prevent overproduction, in aims of preserving the environment by limiting textile waste. In production, we use natural, toxin-free dyes on our biodegradable silk as we stand firm in our commitment to be kind to the earth.
Understandably, a lot of designer houses have opted to move their production overseas. Ayuna consciously chooses to keep everything local. She stands firm behind her decision. She believes in supporting her hometownâs local economy and keeping resources within her community. It also makes it easier to control the quality of the finished garments. Every piece is made from naturally sourced silk (OEKO-TEX standard 100). Being called the queen of textiles, silk compliments all bodies as it lays organically on the skin. Our true silk is smooth to touch. ALIDA opted for a 22 mommes design, which means the silk is heavier and firmer than what other brands bring to the public.
Wearing ALIDA is an invitation to unleash oneâs creativity and empower women to take control of their own personal style. All of the brandâs colours are interchangeable and styled by the right accessoires, right for every occasion.
HRWF (29.07.2022) – On the eve of President Emmanuel Macronâs visit to Benin, Human Rights Without Frontiers (HRWF) filed a report with the United Nations Universal Periodic Review (UPR) for Benin, in which the organisation outlined its concerns over human rights abuses in Benin, with particular regard to the continued detention of opposition figures Reckya Madougou and JoĂ«l Aivo and the fact that they were not included in a list of 17 detainees due to be temporarily released after a 13 June 2022 meeting between President Patrice Talon and Thomas Boni Yayi, former President of Benin (2006-2016).Â
A press release with a copy of the report was sent to more than 500 French journalists and media, as well as to the members of the French Parliament and Senate. Eighty MPs signed an open letter denouncing the continued destruction of democracy by President Talon since 2016.Â
July 26, Moscow. Yuri Borisov, Director of the Russian Space Agency, Roscosmos, announced that it will withdraw from the International Space Station after 2024 and that Russia will focus on building its own orbital base.
The announcement, amid high tensions between Moscow and the West over the war in Ukraine, casts doubt on the future of the ISS, with experts saying it would be extremely difficult to keep it running without the Russians.
The International Space Station has been a symbol of international cooperation after the Cold War, but it is now one of the few areas of cooperation prevailing between the United States and Russia. NASA and its partners had planned the continuation of this operational collaboration until 2030. For scientists this is distressing news because of the valuable professional collaboration between the space agencies to date.
Borisov’s statement confirmed earlier comments by Russian officials about Moscow’s intention to abandon the ISS after 2024, when current international agreements for its operation end. Russian authorities have complained on many occasions that the wear and tear on the ISS puts the station’s safety and lifespan at risk.
Algeria celebrate every July 5th, the double anniversary of the Independence and Youth. In the wake of the celebration of the 60th anniversary of Algeriaâs Independence Day, this year, the Embassy of Algeria in The Hague held on July 03rd 2022 a commemorative ceremony in presence of a sizable number of Algerian nationals living in the Netherlands.
After flag-raising and wreath-laying ceremonies in remembrance of Algerian Martyrs, H.E. Ambassador Salima Abdelhak gave an address in which she paid tribute to heroism ad abnegation of martyrs and veterans during liberation war. In this regard, she pointed out the necessity of perpetuating ideals and values that guided our ancestors throughout their longstanding fight for freedom and emancipation.
60th anniversary of Algeriaâs Independence Day.
Moreover, Ambassador Abdelhak lauded the deep-rooted attachment of Algerian diaspora overseas including Nationals in The Netherlands to their homeland and their contribution in the economic and political progress of Algeria and its cultural radiance in today’s world.
In this context, she renewed her commitment alongside with entire embassy staff to serve the Algerian community living in The Netherlands and employ all legal means to safeguard their interests in compliance with the President of the Republicâs guidelines.
Afterwards, an entertaining competition dubbed “Algeria Quiz” which consisted of series of questions related to the culture, geography and history of Algeria was convened, with a remarkable participation of 22 Algerian children. Despite its playful and enjoyable aspect, this contest enabled us to teach participants many relevant information about Algeria.
H.E. Ambassador Salima Abdelhak during her speech.
Later on, nine young girls took part in a traditional dress show, during which they come onto the stage wearing national dresses of the various regions of Algeria, to display richness and diversity of local culture.
Eventually, medals and gifts were offered to the young participants whereas two big pies and savoury snacks were served to the general public amid a friendly atmosphere.
The Pakistan Federal Minister for Commerce and Investment H.E. Syed Naveed Qamar visited the Netherlands on 24th May 2022. He underscored the longstanding friendly and cooperative relations with the Netherlands and wishes to strengthen and diversify bilateral trade and economic linkages in the years ahead.
Bilateral economic relations between Pakistan and the Netherlands have been consistently on upward trajectory, a reaffirmation that came from Pakistanâs Federal Minister for Commerce and Investment, Syed Naveed Qamar and Mr. Paul Huijts, Secretary General, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Netherlands after their meeting in the Hague to discuss the new GSP+ scheme.
The Minister held meetings with the GSP+ stakeholders including Dutch officials, businesses, trade bodies and civil society organisations. The visit was part of Pakistanâs campaign to sensitise the stakeholders in EU member states about the milestones achieved by Pakistan in implementation of conventions under the GSP+ obligations.
Minister Qamar highlighted that the GSP Plus was an excellent template and a success story of mutually beneficial cooperation as EU exports to Pakistan have grown by 69% whereas Netherlandsâ exports to Pakistan have grown by 107% since the grant of GSP+ in 2014. Pakistanâs exports to EU have grown by 86% whereas exports to the Netherlands have grown by 108% in the meantime. He expressed the hope that the new GSP Plus regulation would continue to focus on its central tenets of supporting sustainable development, poverty alleviation and good governance in the beneficiary countries.
H.E. Syed Naveed Qamar, Pakistan Federal Minister for Commerce and Investment during his speech.
The Minister underscored that Pakistan and the Netherlands enjoyed excellent relations, which were based on mutual respect, trust, and common interests. He emphasised that strong trade and investment cooperation were important components of Pakistan-Netherlands bilateral relations. The Netherlands is the second largest trade partner of Pakistan in EU and a key investor in various sectors of Pakistan.
Mr. Paul Huijts appreciated the positive trajectory in the overall bilateral relations, including substantial growth in bilateral trade. Mr. Huijts also thanked Pakistan for its support and facilitation for the Netherlandsâ evacuation operation from Afghanistan.
Later, Minister Syed Naveed Qamar addressed a seminar, attended by Dutch businesses, investors, trade associations, Civil Society / Non-Governmental Organisations and the Netherlands-based Pakistanis importing from Pakistan. He apprised the audience of key achievements made in implementing GSP Plus requirements. He also spoke broadly about the trade and investment opportunities and possible avenues for collaboration between the Dutch and Pakistani businesses.
The Minister apprised his audience of sensitivities and the challenges likely to be faced by any developing country like Pakistan with regards to new GSP+ scheme replacing the existing one, spanning from 2024 to 2034. “There is no lack of sincerity in implementing GSP+ related conventions on part of Pakistan.” the Minister reiterated. “Three successful biennial reviews are a testimony to the fact that Pakistan has made huge strides in meeting its human rights, governance, and environment related obligations.”
The Minister was of the view that while designing new scheme, capacity of the developing countries must be borne in mind. Moreover, GSP+ is a development assistance tool; hence it should not turn into a commerce restrictive at the end. Improvement in human rights, governance, environment, and socio-economic uplift of masses are the common goals achieved through GSP+ which must be preserved rather stalling further progress in these areas.
Concluding the session, the Minister invited the Dutch companies to explore business opportunities in Pakistan in agriculture, dairy, water management, maritime and clean energy. The Minister also responded to various queries from the audience.
H.E. Syed Naveed Qamar, Pakistan Federal Minister for Commerce and Investment meeting the medias in The Hague.
Apart from the Netherlands, Minister Syed Naveed Qamar went on to visit major EU capitals of Berlin, Brussels and Paris where he met his counterparts.
Minister Syed Naveed Qamar met with the media and briefed them about the targets his visit achieved.
ICJ Judge Cesar Bengzon Hall Inaugurated at Philippine Embassy in The Hague
19 July 2022, The Hague â The ICJ Judge Cesar Bengzon Hall at the Embassy of the Philippines in The Hague was inaugurated Tuesday, 19 July 2022, in a ceremony attended by the Vice President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), four other judges of the ICJ, and other international legal luminaries, diplomats and Filipino community members.
The event was held in honor of Chief Justice Cesar Bengzon as the first and so far the only Filipino Judge of the International Court of Justice, who served a full nine year-term at the World Court from 1967 to 1976. Also honored were two highly acclaimed Filipino jurists, Justice Florentino Feliciano, former Senior Associate Justice of the Supreme Court and founding Member and then President of the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization (1995 to 2001); and Dean Raul C. Pangalangan, Judge of the International Criminal Court (ICC) (2015 to 2021).
H.E. Kirill Gevorgian, ICJ Vice President, delivering his remarks during the dedication ceremony.
In his keynote address, ICJ Vice President Kirill Gevorgian praised the valuable experience of Judge Bengzon as Chief Justice of the Philippine Supreme Court which provided a different perspective to the members of the ICJ and gave added flavor to the work of the Court and the development of international law.
âJudge Bengzon made significant contributions to the work of the Court and to the development of international law⊠He contributed to a number of seminal judgments and advisory opinions that have become crucial to the protection of human rights around the world,â added Gevorgian.
Gevorgian recalled how he met Bengzon for the first time in the 1970s in Moscow, when Gevorgian was a young lawyer, during a lecture given by Bengzon on the protection of human rights.
âThroughout his illustrious career, Judge Bengzon is known as a staunch defender of human rights. He served for many years as a Member and President of the Philippine section of the International Commission of Jurists, an international non-government organization dedicated to the defense of human rights and the rule of law worldwide,â said Judge Gevorgian.
Chief Justice Alexander Gesmundo addresses the assembly through video remarks.
Bengzonâs âappointment to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) capped a brilliant career in the service of his fellow men and womenâŠ. This honor given by the Philippine Embassy is but a fitting tribute to a man who is an epitome of integrity and excellence, a Philippine magistrate who had made waves throughout the world,â Gesmundo said.
(L-R) H.E. Peter Tomka (ICJ Judge), H.E. Iwasawa Yuji (ICJ Judge), Ambassador J. Eduardo Malaya, H.E. Kirill Gevorgian (ICJ Vice President), Mr. Anthony Bengzon (grandson of ICJ Judge Cesar Bengzon) and H.E. Hilary Charlesworth (ICJ Judge).
Meanwhile, ICJ Judge Iwasawa Yuji, in his remarks, highlighted the achievements of the two other honorees. “Justice Feliciano was a towering figure in international law. I was fortunate to work with him, and as his colleague, I was especially impressed with his meticulous nature and attention to details. His expertise went far beyond international trade law and international commercial arbitration. He was also a prolific academic whose scholarship touched on almost every area of international trade law ranging from the law of war, to the law of the sea, and human rights law,” according to Judge Iwasawa.
H.E. Iwasawa Yuji, ICJ Judge, delivering his message at the dedication ceremony.
Judge Iwasawa also noted Judge Pangalangan’s profound impact in the ICC where he served as a judge from 2015 to 2021. “In addition to his extensive involvement with the ICC, Judge Pangalangan has made significant scholarly contributions to the fields of international criminal law and international humanitarian law. In particular, he has lectured and taught at the University of the Philippines, Harvard Law School, and The Hague Academy of International Law, among many other prestigious institutions. Although his work is primarily international in nature, Judge Pangalangan has also greatly enriched the legal culture of his native country,” said Judge Iwasawa.
Ambassador J. Eduardo Malaya delivering his welcome remarks.
In his opening remarks, Ambassador J. Eduardo Malaya, said that “by having this event, the Embassy and the Philippines Government reaffirm its abiding faith and commitment to international law and the rule of law in inter-state relations. We do this by recalling the valuable services of three eminent Filipinos who in their own ways have made significant contributions to the international legal institutions they served and to the field of international law generally⊠By inaugurating the ICJ Judge Bengzon Hall, we hope that it would be a place that would memorialize the legacies of Bengzon, Feliciano, and Pangalangan not only for the Philippines and other countries, but to the The Hague, which we call affectionately as the international city of peace and justice.”
Bengzon is the sole Filipino and Southeast Asian to have sat at the ICJ, Malaya noted.
(L-R) H.E. Hilary Charlesworth (ICJ Judge), H.E. Iwasawa Yuji (ICJ Judge), Ambassador J. Eduardo Malaya, H.E. Peter Tomka (ICJ Judge), H.E. Kirill Gevorgian (ICJ Vice President), Ms. Josephine Feliciano Reyes, H.E. Manuel Antonio J. Teehankee (PH Permanent Representative to the WTO in Geneva).(L-R) Prof. Elizabeth Aguiling-Pangalangan, H.E. Hilary Charlesworth (ICJ Judge), H.E. Iwasawa Yuji (ICJ Judge), H.E. Peter Tomka (ICJ Judge), H.E. Kirill Gevorgian (ICJ Vice President), Dean Raul Pangalangan, Ambassador J. Eduardo Malaya and Dr. Rena Cristina Koa-Malaya.
In attendance were a number of international law luminaries and diplomats, notably ICJ Judges Peter Tomka and Hilary Charlesworth, Secretary General of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, Marcin Czepelak, Secretary General of The Hague Academy of International Law, Prof. Jean-Marc Thouvenin, Director of the Netherlandâs Ministry of Foreign Affairs – Department of Asia and Oceania, Karin Mossenlechner and Mr. Jules van Eijndhoven, Head of the MFA Treaties Division. Permanent Representative of the Philippine Mission to the World Trade Organization in Geneva Manuel Teehankee also attended the inauguration.
The members of the Bengzon and Feliciano families, who came all the way from the Philippines and the U.S. for the occasion, were appreciative of the tribute accorded to their forebears. âWe, the family of Cesar Bengzon, are grateful to the Philippine Embassy and Ambassador Malaya for extending to us the invitation to attend the inauguration of the ICJ Judge Cesar Bengzon Hall. We are truly privileged and deeply honored to be here today,â Mr. Anthony Bengzon, grandson of Chief Justice Bengzon, said in his message.
The family of Justice Feliciano, through daughter Ms. Josephine Feliciano Reyes, was equally thankful of the honor given to Justice Feliciano. As she fondly recounted the happy memories of her father, she narrated how in everything he did, âthe underlying motivation was love for the country because the Philippines and the Filipino people have much to offer to the world.â In a letter he wrote to a young Filipino lawyer who was offered a position in a law firm abroad, Justice Feliciano said âI hope you will come back to the Philippines, because if all bright young minds leave the Philippines, who will be left to care about her?â
Judge Raul Pangalangan delivering his message.
Judge Pangalangan in his eloquent message of thanks, underscored the key role international law has played in Philippine history and for every Filipino. âInternational Law has always played a central role in the shaping of Filipino history. Today it is no longer the domain solely of diplomats, high-level jurists, and high-minded scholars alone. Today it has become part of the mundane, quotidian needs of the ordinary Filipino, authenticating a birth certificate of a child born abroad, getting a foreign divorce recognized locally, and conversely respecting the rights of spouses in mixed marriages, on one hand, and on the other, securing the hopes for redress of human rights victims and asserting our claims to the resources of the oceans for the next generation of Filipinos.â
âPersonally, I am gratified that our Republic gave me a chance to participate in that noble work. International law is not just about rules and provisions. It is actually about ideals and hopesâdreams that will outlive us all. We are merely temporary custodians, and I wish we prove ourselves worthy,â Pangalangan added.
Pictures by courtesy of the Embassy of the Philippines.
