Le développement de la justice pénale internationale est, depuis ses débuts, étroitement lié à celui du multilatéralisme. Alors que notre monde globalisé se retrouve confronté à des défis sans précédent dans l’histoire de l’humanité (notamment le réchauffement climatique), on assiste – paradoxalement – depuis plusieurs années, à une remise en cause profonde de ce mode de gouvernance, de ses valeurs et de ses outils, au profit d’actions politiques et militaires fragmentées, voire unilatérales. L’agression de l’Ukraine par la Russie illustre douloureusement cette tendance.
La crise du multilatéralisme signifie-t-elle pour autant que la justice pénale internationale n’a pas sa place dans le monde de demain ? Rien n’est moins sûr. L’émoi légitime que suscite l’invasion de l’Ukraine pourrait, au contraire, être l’occasion de redynamiser une justice internationale encore trop dépendante des intérêts des grandes puissances, pour lui offrir un nouveau souffle et consacrer sa dimension universelle.
L’essor du multilatéralisme et de la justice pénale internationale.
Les lendemains de la seconde guerre mondiale voient naître plusieurs institutions globales dans le domaine de la sécurité, de la paix et de la protection des droits de l’homme (notamment l’Organisation des Nations Unies). L’idée de sanctionner les auteurs de crimes internationaux germe dans ce contexte avec la création des tribunaux militaires de Nuremberg et de Tokyo en 1946 et la signature des conventions de Genève en 1949.
Largement interrompu avec le déclenchement de la Guerre froide, ce mouvement reprend à la fin du XXème siècle avec la chute de l’Empire Soviétique. C’est ainsi que naissent les premières juridictions pénales internationales « modernes », le Tribunal pénal international pour l’Ex-Yougoslavie en 1993 et celui pour le Rwanda un an plus tard. D’autres tribunaux ad hoc, en Sierra-Leone, au Cambodge, au Liban et ailleurs voient également le jour dans la première partie du XXIème siècle avec le soutien politique, juridique ou technique de l’ONU.
En 2002, la Cour pénale internationale (CPI), juridiction à vocation universelle et permanente, fait ses premiers pas. Depuis, la CPI (qui compte désormais 123 États membres) enquête sur les génocides, les crimes contre l’Humanité, les crimes de guerre et le crime d’agression aux quatre coins de la planète.
Le contexte géopolitique ayant favorisé l’émergence de ces juridictions pénales internationales est désormais révolu. En déclenchant un conflit armé majeur sur le sol européen et en recourant à la force en dehors du cadre prévu par la Charte des Nations Unies, Vladimir Poutine a mis en relief un changement de paradigme des relations internationales qui n’a pourtant pas débuté avec la guerre en Ukraine. Cette tendance, qui risque de marquer durablement les relations inter-étatiques pour les années avenir, s’est toutefois accompagnée d’initiatives judiciaires et quasi-judiciaires uniques dans l’histoire de la justice internationale.
Le Lawfare de la guerre en Ukraine
Le néologisme Lawfare, en anglais, est une contraction des mots Law (le droit) et Warfare (la guerre). Pour le Professeur Julian Fernandez, il se définit comme « la volonté de toute partie à un conflit de se servir du droit international à des fins stratégiques, d’invoquer la violation d’une norme opposable à un adversaire moins pour obtenir réparation que pour fragiliser un discours et renforcer ainsi sa propre position dans une situation de tensions ». En somme, la guerre par le droit. Si les moyens du Lawfare ont été utilisé bien avant le début de la guerre en Ukraine, ils l’ont rarement été de manière aussi rapide et généralisée.
Le 26 février 2022, deux jours après l’invasion russe de son territoire, l’Ukraine saisissait la Cour Internationale de Justice pour faire reconnaitre l’illégalité de l’opération militaire Russe à son encontre. Dans une ordonnance du 16 mars 2022, la CIJ donnait raison à l’Ukraine et appelait la Russie et « les unités militaires sous son contrôle et sa direction », à suspendre immédiatement leurs opérations en Ukraine.
Dans les jours suivants, 41 États (dont tous les pays de l’Union Européenne) déféraient officiellement la situation en Ukraine au nouveau Procureur de la Cour Pénale Internationale, Karim Khan, lui permettant de débuter immédiatement une enquête sur les possibles crimes de guerre et crimes contre l’humanité commis dans le pays depuis le 21 novembre 2013. D’autres voix appellent à la création d’un tribunal international spécial pour juger les auteurs de l’agression Russe à l’encontre de l’Ukraine, quitte à juger les responsables russes en leur absence, comme le propose François Roux.
Le 4 mars 2022, le Conseil des droits de l’homme de l’ONU votait une résolution instaurant une commission internationale indépendante d’enquête chargé d’enquêter sur les violations des droits de l’Homme et du droit international humanitaire résultant de l’invasion russe en Ukraine en vue de futurs procès, sur le modèle des mécanismes pour la Syrie et du Myanmar.
Soyons clair. Ces diverses actions n’empêcheront pas Vladimir Poutine de poursuivre son offensive militaire voire de l’accentuer, tant la survie politique du régime russe dépend d’une victoire militaire à court terme. Mais l’enjeu n’est pas là. L’objectif est de rappeler que le droit international est du côté de l’Ukraine et que les crimes de guerre sur son territoire ne sont pas seulement rejetés par un groupe d’États spécifiques, mais par la Communauté internationale dans son ensemble.
Un second souffle pour la justice pénale internationale ?
Sans omettre la dimension politique et circonstancielle de cette stratégie, il semble que l’année 2022 puisse être une année charnière dans l’histoire de la justice pénale internationale. La rapidité avec laquelle la Communauté internationale utilise aujourd’hui les instruments du droit pénal international pour répondre aux crimes commis en Ukraine démontre sa pertinence et sa maturité. Elle marque également un tournant dans son histoire en visant les crimes commis par une puissance disposant pourtant d’un droit de véto au Conseil de Sécurité des Nations Unies.
Pour être crédible, il faut toutefois que cette démarche ne reste pas un cas isolé et ne soit plus à géométrie variable. Souvent accusée de partialité, voire de néo-colonialisme, l’action des tribunaux internationaux est scrutée par les défenseurs des droits de l’Homme comme par les communautés touchées par les crimes sur lesquelles ils enquêtent. Or, jusqu’à présent, le moins que l’on puisse dire, c’est que la justice pénale internationale n’a pas démontré sa capacité à s’attaquer aux grandes puissances de ce monde ou à leurs alliés.
La légitimité de la justice internationale dépend pourtant de son impartialité et de sa volonté à poursuivre les auteurs de crimes internationaux indistinctement de leur nationalité ou de leur proximité avec puissances de ce monde. Malgré leur forte dépendance aux États (qui financent leurs opérations et leur permettent de mener des enquêtes ou d’arrêter des individus sur leur territoire), les juridictions pénales internationales ne doivent pas céder aux sirènes de la realpolitik et ancrer leur action sur le long terme. Comme le montre l’histoire récente, la politique internationale est fluctuante, imprévisible. Si les intérêts nationaux changent, l’universalité de la justice doit rester la même.
Cette évolution est déterminante pour que demain, les acteurs des juridictions pénales internationales, et notamment la CPI, contribuent à la promotion d’un véritable « État de droit mondial » et d’une « communauté internationale de valeurs » encore balbutiante. L’Histoire dira s’ils sauront saisir cette opportunité.
Me Johann Soufi
Avocat international. Ancien chef de la Section des avis juridiques du Tribunal Spécial pour le Liban et Conseiller juridique de l’Organisation des Nations Unies.
Les opinions exprimées dans ce billet sont purement personnelles, l’auteur ne s’exprimant aucunement en sa capacité officielle. Elles n’engagent donc pas les Nations Unies, ses agences ou l’un des quelconques employeurs de l’auteur.
IHE Delft Institute for Water Education and Movies that Matter are organizing a screening of the documentary Above Water (original title: Marcher sur l’Eau), which is part of the Movies that Matter Festival, held annually in The Hague.
By Ewoud Kok, IHE Delft Institute for Water Education
IHE Delft Institute for Water Education and Movies that Matter are organizing a screening of the documentary Above Water (original title: Marcher sur l’Eau), which is part of the Movies that Matter Festival, held annually in The Hague.
Above Water, by French director Aïssa Maïga, illustrates the dire consequences of climate change in the Sahel, where a lack of water dominates life and limits the possibilities of inhabitants. It will be screened at 15:00 on Sunday 10 April in The Hague – for tickets, see this link.
Droughts in the Azawagh region of Niger endanger the semi-nomadic livelihoods of residents: they worsen conditions for people who already suffer from water scarcity. The situation in the Sahel is not unique: In 2020, about 2 billion people – a quarter of the global population – lacked access to safely managed drinking water, meaning their human rights are not fulfilled.
According to a report by UNESCO, on a global scale, half of the people who drink water from unsafe sources live in Africa. In Sub-Saharan Africa, only 24% of the population have access to safe drinking water, and just 28% have access to basic sanitation facilities that are not shared with other households. Unequal access in Africa is also linked to gender disparity. The burden of collecting water lies mainly on women and girls, many of whom spend more than 30 minutes on each journey to fetch water, a situation that prevents them from attending school.
About the Azawagh region
During the short rainy season, which lasts one to three months, households depend on marshes to meet their primary water needs for drinking, cooking, washing and livestock. This water is turbid and contaminated with weeds, human filth and animal excrement. While this source of water is non-potable, it is plentiful enough to support families.
After the rainy season ends, the people of the Azawak rely on water holes they manually dig into the dried marshes, in surface sediment up to 20 metres deep. During the nine- to eleven-month-long dry season, most individuals survive on less than six litres of water per person and per day (the World Health Organization prescribes a minimum of 15 to 25 litres per day and per person) and have difficulty finding time for other revenue-generating activities or school.
The cinematographically impressive documentary features mesmerizing landscape shots while delivering a stark and serious message: those without water are done waiting for access – they need it now.
Above Water / Marcher sur l’Eau at IHE Delft.
Talk
After the screening of Above Water, moderator Ama van Dantzig dives into the causes, consequences and possible solutions of water shortage with professor Eddy Moors (rector IHE Delft), Jean Gildas Tapsoba (MSc student in Water Management and Governance, IHE Delft) and Elisabeth Lictevout (director of the International Groundwater Resources Assessment Centre.)
Why are regions like the Sahel so vulnerable to droughts? What is the best way to alleviate the urgent needs of local populations – is it a matter of digging more and deeper holes to access groundwater? What is the role of women? And what structural solutions are needed to ensure that all people have access of water and sanitation, as called for in Sustainable Development Goals (SDG6)?
IHE Delft Marketing Officer Ewoud Kok, who oversees the Institute’s marketing campaigns and plays a key part in communicating the organisation’s marketing messages.
He graduated from the Delft University of Technology in 2003 and since then regularly updated his skills at various workshops and courses, including a short MBA at Nyenrode Business University. Ewoud is part of the IHE Delft’s Communications Office since 2003.
“Asia’s Century” International Project 2022 – 2027 was launched in Bucharest late March by a consortium of think-tanks consisting of the Bucharest-based MEPEI (Middle East Political and Economic Institute), Eurodefense Romania and ICI (National Institute for Research & Development in Informatics), together with the Ljubljana-based IFIMES (International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies) and the Vienna-based AIES (Austrian Institute for European and Security Policy), and it enjoyed a numerous live and online audience consisting of ambassadors and representatives of MENA and Asian embassies, academics, researchers and media.
To explain the goal of their project, the organizers quoted several Western thinkers who emphasized the propensity towards superiority of the Western world which created “a global order for the benefit of the West”, and they explained “the need for the EU to work towards an in-depth understanding of Asia, as well as the need for Asia to develop a better understanding of the EU’s complexity and diversity and the potential of cooperation.”
Sven Biscop from Egmont Foundation one said that “The superiority complex is hard to cure. Nobody in Europe is longing for a return to empire…Most Americans still pretend they never even had an empire. But Europeans and Americans that we are entitled to dominate international politics and that it is perfectly natural that the EU and the US are the wealthiest places on Earth. We feel that we have merited this through our hard work – the implication being that if other people are less well off, they have merited that also. The reality is, of course, that we created the international order to our economic benefit.”. Under the current circumstances of increasing global interdependences, there is a need for the EU to overcome its “superiority complex.”
“Neither Europe nor Asia has any alternative. The difference is that Europe knows there is no alternative – and therefore is multilateral. Asia thinks it has an alternative – and therefore is strikingly bilateral, while stubbornly residing enveloped in economic egoisms. No wonder that Europe is/will be able to manage its decline, while Asia is (still) unable to capitalize its successes”, said Anis Bajrektarevic from IFIMES, keynote speaker during the event. Bajrektarevic recalled that “there is no country in Asia without at least 2 border conflicts and Asia is not like Europe which has the Helsinki spirit”. He also stressed that “globalization favours the strong and the fast, while multilateralization provides the same footing”, and “trade and economic relations do not necessarily prevent war, we have already seen that when the WWII started, so we must all acknowledge that peace requires a comprehensive setting based on mutual understanding and good on-going communication.”
The Ukraine conflict is an occasion for everybody to see clearer, to learn, to become wiser and to act accordingly.
Werner Fasslabend from AIES, former Austrian minister of defense, also declared the 21st century to be “the Asian century”, if not “the Indo-Pacific century”, where China will play a major role, especially with its OBOR/ Belt and Road Initiative in which the maritime corridor will have a vital role, since 70% of the world is covered by water and 90% of the world trade is done by sea. Fasslabend also stressed the importance of the Asian powers that are technological leaders and of the Asian markets that are very useful for Europe because they are huge. His only concern is whether “Europe will be able to take part in this huge Asian development.”
Adrian Severin, Romanian former minister of foreign affairs and former European parliamentarian, reminded that “the West imposed its power on the others, the US imposed Pax Americana but America no longer has the strength to promote the American Dream and a new world order. It’s not our job to tell the Asian countries what to do but it’s our interest to look at Asia. We should look at Asia with Euro-Atlantic eye-glasses”, concluded Severin.
Viorel Isticioaia-Budura, former Romanian ambassador to China and former Head of Asia-Pacific Department of the European External Action Service of the EU, deplored the lack of action of the EU institutions in Asia which he labels as “anaemia of EU institutions under circumstances where the potential exists but the results are rather disappointing.”
“It looks unavoidable that two major regions of the planet, the West and the East, may embark upon a new phase of interaction, seeking a new balance, mutual adjustments and refreshed ideas for partnership, not in the polarizing, but in a spirit that may help to explore possible convergence and mutually beneficial cooperation. An Asian Century does not mean throwing other regions into shadow or letting the West slide into an eclipse. On the contrary, it means a new game. With its high-speed industrialization and urbanization, rising rates of consumption and the dynamic generation of Millenials, Asia looks challenging.”
Isticioaia-Budura put forward the idea that “there is already an economic order in Asia with China leading it.” Indeed, starting with January, 1, 2022, the world’s largest trade agreement ever, the RCEP (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership), initiated by China, entered into force. It will facilitate trade among the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. RCEP will cover about 30% of global GDP and nearly a third of the world’s population, about 2.2 billion people.
According to Flavius Caba-Maria, director of MEPEI, the goal of this “Asia’s Century” International Project 2022 – 2027 is “to understand the mutual needs and interests between Europe and Asia, to stimulate the interest of officials, business people towards Asia, and to raise the public awareness, especially of the young generation, about Asia” because “in 2040, Asia will have had 50% of the world population and 40% of the global consumption, and in 2050, 3 billion Asians will live at European standards. In 2030, China will be the first economic power of the world. China may lead the process of Asianization and we are now wondering how the Asia-led global order will be like.”
Liviu Muresan from Eurodefense Romania, co-organizer of the event, informed the participants that “Asia’s Century” International Project 2022 – 2027 will have a regular Asian Club organized monthly in downtown Bucharest and he will make efforts to organize multi-level cross-sectorial visits across Asia to bring together all the parties interested in extending their pan-Asian relations with concrete outcome on the ground.
What I have learned from teaching English to my Ukrainian refugee students:
Learning English allows my students to go through the grieving process in order to find healing and can be very therapeutic.
English allows my students to be in denial. Coming to class and learning English is a distraction from the destruction going on back home. They come to class in desperate need of something to avert their attention…so we conjugate verbs and practice pronunciation.
English class comforts my students when they’re angry by redirecting their focus and allowing them to cool off. In a classroom of refugees each student knows that someone nearby knows what they’re going through. There is quick camaraderie as we practice phrases such as, “I am from the Ukraine” and “I am Ukrainian”.
Learning English allows my students to bargain. They can come to class and feel like they are in control of a small part of their lives. When everything else around them seems to be spinning out of control, English class remains. It is constant. My students may not know how to order a meal, where they will live next week, or what city their new child will be born in, but they can practice possessive adjectives.
Learning English helps my students to avoid depression because it offers them a small goal to work towards each day. It gets them out of their rut or that ever-downward spiral and offers them hope as they envision their future selves as English speakers, dreaming of what they may be or attain someday. My classroom is filled with physicians, new mothers, accountants, hairdressers, and engineers that desire to live and thrive.
Learning English assists my students in accepting their circumstances. Many of my students will not return to their homeland, and they will need to start a new life elsewhere. Knowing English will provide more opportunities for their new lives. Attending English class each week is the baby-step they must take in order to achieve and create this new life.
Ali Redling teaching Ukrainians refugees at Leonardo Royal Hotel in The Hague.
Diplomat Magazine note: Ali Redling is shaping refugees’ lives by imparting her knowledge and always inspires them to dream, to fight, and to never give up.Ali is preparing a group of Ukrainians refugees for the challenges of tomorrow. They already said about her: “She will have a tremendous impact on our lives”.
This extended ESL program has been made possible by the warm hospitality offered by Catherine Anne Daily who transformed the ground floor of her monumental residence on the Berkenbosch Blokstraat and offered it as an “international house” and ad hoc classroom space.
The year 2021 marked the 70th anniversary of our Organization. On December 5th, 1951, an International Migration Conference was convened in Brussels where a group of 19 countries, including The Netherlands, decided to establish the Organization, which is today IOM, under the name of Provisional Intergovernmental Committee for the Movement of Migrants from Europe (PICMME). Mandated to help European governments to identify resettlement countries for the estimated 11 million people uprooted by the Second World War, it arranged safe transport for nearly a million migrants during the 1950s.
Still, IOM’s origins were quite modest in scope and its future quite uncertain: PICMME was in fact a provisional body. A Committee with a temporary mandate and operations limited to a single continent. Yet, its importance to the lives of those who benefited from these early international transportation services, safe and dignified transport of migrants is an activity which remains a key feature of our work, to this day.
The following year, in 1952, the first of several name and mandate changes took place, as PICCME became the Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration (ICEM), which was no longer provisional but was still limited to operations in Europe.
28 years later, in 1980, the Organization’s name changed to the Intergovernmental Committee for Migration (ICM), in recognition of the Organization’s increasingly global role, in particular in Latin America and South-East Asia. By this time, the Organization had already assisted over 3 million migrants with transport and provided other support services in numerous other areas.
Finally, in 1989, ICM became the International Organization for Migration (IOM), having expanded still further its reach and programme range of services. The status of the Organization has further evolved since then, featuring constant growth in its scope of work and size of operations. In September 2016, IOM fully joined the UN family as a UN related organization with a nearly universal membership. Today, IOM is indeed a global organization, with a global footprint and a presence at some 450 locations in nearly 160 countries.
In The Netherlands IOM opened an office in 1991 and thus we have also marked its 30th anniversary in one of the Organization founding Member States. Since then, at the request of the Dutch government, IOM has been facilitating the voluntary return of migrants under the ‘Return and Emigration Assistance from the Netherlands’ – or REAN – programme. In the past 30 years, more than 68,000 migrants in the Netherlands have returned to more than 100 different countries with the support of IOM. This could not have been achieved without the close cooperation with government agencies, embassies, municipalities, non-governmental organizations, migrant organizations, etc….
Indeed, IOM’s network today is as broad as the number of migration topics IOM is involved in the world. In The Netherlands, besides return migration, a whole range of projects within different themes have been developed by IOM over the years and cooperate with, such as in resettlement, family reunification, integration, labour migration and involving the diaspora in the development of their countries of origin through temporary work assignments. Establishing relationships with the private sector have become increasingly important as well.
In the last decade, IOM has continued to grow at a steady pace, with an increase from 146 Member States to 174. The IOM budget on a global level has also increased by another 50%, with annual expenditure now exceeding USD 2 billion. The Organization’s workforce has doubled, to over 20,000 staff members, working around the globe, mostly in the field.
Over time, IOM’s role and responsibilities have expanded considerably, in line with the growing importance of migration and displacement (be man-made or nature/climate disaster related) as key issues which require support, solidarity and dialogue within the international community. In that respect, the adoption of the UN Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration in 2018 has been a watershed moment in this regard.
Then, as today, IOM stands side by side with its Member States and the global international community in contributing to achieve its goals, and to do so with flexibility and responsiveness, while remaining as close to the migrant it serves as possible, on the ground, in the field. Even more so, as the challenges posed by global pandemic and tragic conflicts keep testing all of us in endurance and resolve to fulfil our mandate with care and dignity.
This occasion should make us all reflect on the crucial role that migration had and still has in the socio-economic growth of societies in peace, tolerance, and respect of everyone human rights!
Allow me now to remark that this incredible and exciting journey has been possible thanks to the longstanding dedication, commitment, and professionalism of our staff worldwide, including our team of almost 80 people here in The Netherlands.
To conclude, it has been indeed my great honour and pride to be part of IOM for good 28 years and to lead its mission here in The Netherlands since late 2018, continuing the invaluable work done along with several thousands of IOM staff over the past seventy years, worldwide.
Par S.E. M. Slim Ghariani, Ambassadeur de Tunisie à La Haye
C’était en 1995, lors d’une épreuve écrite d’un examen pour la promotion à un grade supérieur dans ma carrière professionnelle, que je me suis imaginé entrain de présenter mes lettres de créances en qualité d’ambassadeur de la Tunisie auprès d’un pays dans lequel j’avais auparavant servi en tant que jeune diplomate. Comme il n’est pas de coutume qu’un diplomate soit affecté à deux reprises dans une même capitale, cette vision d’esprit et les éléments de composition qui l’ont étayée avaient été estimés originaux et jugés attrayants par le jury, ce qui m’a valu une bonne appréciation et contribué à mon accession au grade de Conseiller d’Ambassade.
Cette “prophétie” insolite vient providentiellement de se réaliser en 2021. Ayant travaillé aux Pays-Bas entre 1993 et 1999, tout au début de ma carrière diplomatique, je viens d’y retourner cette année en qualité d’Ambassadeur. Ma joie est donc immense d’avoir retrouvé mes premiers repères professionnels et un pays extraordinaire, géographiquement “petit” certes, mais “Grand” de par son histoire, ses spécificités singulières, le haut degré de civisme de sa population et ses performances économiques dignes des plus grandes nations développées.
Mes retrouvailles avec les Pays-Bas ravivent en moi de formidables souvenirs tant personnels que professionnels. De Scheveningen à Wassenaar, du Palais de la Paix à Madurodam, en profitant d’agréables moments de contemplation au musée van Gogh à Amsterdam, en passant par Lisse et le paradisiaque Keukenhof, ou en parcourant les rues de Maastricht, la ville phare de l’histoire européenne, je suis de nouveau comblé et ravi.
Mais mon attachement aux Pays-Bas ne date pas de nos jours actuels. Déjà, en 1997, j’ai eu l’honneur d’accompagner mon Ambassadeur de l’époque, nouvellement désigné auprès du Royaume, pour la cérémonie de remise de ses lettres de créances. Ce furent des moments mémorables que de traverser la ville en calèche vers le Palais Royal, vêtus de nos costumes traditionnels tunisiens, de croiser d’aimables néerlandais, émerveillés par le cortège, qui nous saluaient tout le long de l’itinéraire, et d’assister à l’interprétation de l’hymne national de mon pays par un orchestre de cuivres averti, sous les yeux d’un public curieux et amène.
Au cours de la même année, je me souviens d’un évènement extrêmement passionnant que les Néerlandais avaient attendu avec tant d’impatience, à savoir l’organisation de la mythique course de patinage sur glace naturelle qui traverse 11 villes frisonnes (de Elf steden tocht). J’ai découvert, à l’occasion, qu’il s’agit du marathon le plus long du genre dans le monde (près de 200 kms).
Un autre fait, encore plus ancien et non moins fortuit, m’avait en quelque sorte, très tôt, lié d’amitié avec les Pays-Bas. Tout petit et incroyablement fasciné par la radio, je m’amusais à sillonner virtuellement le monde entier en voyageant d’une station à l’autre, ce qui m’a amené à découvrir la “Voix des Pays-Bas” à travers le service international en langue arabe de la Radio hollandaise émettant de Hilversum. Beaucoup plus tard, en débarquant au Royaume, j’ai tenu à visiter cette ville qui a bien rayonné sur mon enfance et m’a fait savourer de multiples facettes de la culture néerlandaise.
En dehors de cette digression, il va sans dire qu’au niveau professionnel, La Haye m’avait d’abord donné l’occasion, tout au début de ma carrière, de découvrir le monde séduisant et tant captivant de l’activité diplomatique multilatérale. Le droit international et le désarmement, à travers notamment la Cour internationale de Justice, le Tribunal pénal international pour l’ex-Yougoslavie et l’Organisation pour l’interdiction des armes chimiques, naissante à l’époque, étaient pour moi des thèmes de prédilection. En 2021, je retrouve une scène encore plus riche, avec la présence de la Cour pénale internationale et l’activité de la Conférence de La Haye de droit international privé, à laquelle la Tunisie a adhéré en 2014.
Aujourd’hui, il m’est dévolu une mission encore plus grande. Outre le volet multilatéral, il m’échoit de contribuer au développement continu des relations bilatérales tuniso-néerlandaises qui sont, par ailleurs, vieilles dans le temps, politiquement excellentes et marquées par une coopération mutuellement bénéfique et aussi bien variée que fructueuse.
Là aussi, des souvenirs juvéniles me reviennent de la visite de feue S.M. la Reine mère Juliana et du Prince Bernhard en Tunisie en mai 1974, en réponse à la visite du Président tunisien Habib Bourguiba à La Haye en juillet 1966. Je me souviens notamment de la balade des deux Chefs d’Etat dans la voiture présidentielle décapotable à travers les rues de la capitale Tunis particulièrement ornées pour la circonstance, et du bain de foule qu’ils ont eu avec une population hospitalière sortie en allégresse pour accueillir l’invitée privilégiée de la Tunisie.
Dans les années soixante, un premier contingent de Tunisiens sont arrivés légalement pour travailler aux Pays-Bas. Aujourd’hui, environ 12 mille de nos compatriotes sont basés au Royaume. L’affluence des touristes néerlandais en Tunisie est allée crescendo, pour atteindre une moyenne de 70 mille visiteurs par an, avec même un pic de 100 mille touristes avant la pandémie de la Covid19. Une centaine d’entreprises néerlandaises, actives dans les secteurs du textile, de l’énergie, des services et de l’agriculture, sont installées en Tunisie depuis des années et exercent avec beaucoup de succès. Une coopération au développement est conjointement menée en Tunisie qui œuvre à la création d’emplois pour les jeunes notamment dans les contrées reculées du pays, et permet surtout de fixer les bénéficiaires dans leurs régions et de contrecarrer la migration clandestine et ce, dans le cadre d’une approche partagée par les deux pays visant à s’attaquer aux causes profondes de tel fléau dramatique.
Et je ne terminerai pas sans mentionner, bien sûr, l’appui inconditionnel des Pays-Bas à la Tunisie engagée, depuis sa révolution en 2011, sur la voie de la démocratisation et la consécration des droits de l’homme, tout comme le soutien généreux du Royaume à mon pays lors de la pandémie du coronavirus.
By Judge Aruna Devi Narain and Marcia Vaune Jocelyn Kran
This article was first published in PassBlue on November 18, 2021
Women have a right to participate in public and political life and the work of international organizations under the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, or CEDAW. This right extends to membership in all UN bodies, including the ten committees that are meant to help countries protect international human-rights obligations. Although the first committee was set up in 1977, gender equality has not been achieved in the membership of most of these entities.
These committees are called treaty bodies, and their role is to monitor a country’s compliance with the UN human-rights treaties that collectively cover civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights; the rights of women, people with disabilities, migrant workers and children; and the right to freedom from torture, disappearance and discrimination. The committees function separately from the Human Rights Council, and committee members are independent experts rather than national officials. As part of their work, committees directly recommend to countries how they can improve their national human-rights policies, laws and action. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, currently led by Michelle Bachelet, acts as the secretariat for the committees, providing the staff that is needed to organize and support committee meetings, most of which are held in Geneva.
The decisions of the committees establish frameworks for national policies, law and programs, ultimately affecting the everyday lives of their citizens, including women. Without an equal number of women experts on board, however, the treaty bodies are more likely to overlook critical issues and perspectives that should be part of their legal agenda.
In June 2021, the Human Rights Council considered a report exploring the impact of women’s underrepresentation in UN bodies and mechanisms — including the treaty bodies — and the overall challenges to gender parity. The report flagged four treaty bodies with particularly low numbers of women among their membership: the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers (14 percent); the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (28 percent); the Committee Against Torture (30 percent); and the Committee on Enforced Disappearances (30 percent). The representation of women across all treaty bodies is 48.83 percent but concentrated in only four of the 10 committees. Two of these address women’s rights and children’s rights: the CEDAW Committee and the Committee on the Rights of the Child, or CRC (The United States is not a party to CEDAW or the CRC.) Currently, gender parity has been achieved only in the 18-member Committee on the Rights of the Child.
In a case against Nepal, in 2019, the Committee dealt with issues of arbitrary arrest and torture including rape and sexual assault of a 14-year old indigenous girl, while in custody. The State Party was held liable for violating ICCPR provisions, including Article 26 on non-discrimination. Similarly, in 2017, Ireland’s restrictive abortion laws were found to be in violation of the Covenant given their inherent arbitrary and discriminatory nature. The Committee required Ireland to pay compensation and offer psychological support to the complainant, Siobhán Whelan.[BM(1]
As we probe the problem of underrepresentation of women on Treaty Bodies, it is clear that one reason for the lack of gender parity in all but one of the treaty bodies is that countries have not nominated enough women as candidates for the committees. Countries that have ratified the relevant treaties nominate candidates and elect members for four-year terms at the UN in New York City. Sadly, most nomination processes are informal and lack transparency, resulting in qualified women candidates left unaware of such vacancies.
Prioritizing gender parity in the countries’ nominal processes remains pivotal to overall effectiveness and the credibility of the treaty body system. Inadequate representation of women across these mechanisms could potentially lead to certain key gender issues being overlooked.
Moreover, the countries may also be hesitant to consider and implement a recommendation by a treaty body on gender related issues when that treaty body’s composition is itself underrepresented by women.
This gender gap can be solved by countries and the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights taking the action recommended in the report to the Human Rights Council. For example, countries could identify women candidates for treaty body membership and, where appropriate, give women preference. They could closely work with civil society organizations like women’s associations to collect profiles of qualified women and widely publicize vacancies including to these groups. They also could incorporate gender as an explicit feature in nomination processes, as was done in Canada’s call for application for membership in the Committee of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. It would also be ideal for the countries to track their progress on these gender parity measures across the ten committees.
While the nomination of more women candidates would be a step forward, we also need to ensure that countries vote for and elect such candidates. Elections during the Covid-19 pandemic have relied on virtual campaigns, and candidates now also reach out to civil society organizations to lobby their governments to vote for qualified women candidates. In addition, an informal group of former women chairs and members of treaty bodies could be set up to mentor women candidates and advise them on their campaigns. Countries that have adopted a feminist foreign policy, like Canada, France, Luxembourg, Mexico and Sweden, could also play a leading role in promoting women candidates.
The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights could broadly advertise upcoming treaty body elections in women’s networks. It could also regularly track the number of women and men serving as independent experts, and make this information public in a format similar to the gender parity dashboard that is used to measure staff composition in the UN Secretariat. And it could help countries design ways to achieve gender parity during the nomination and election processes. The Secretariat could also periodically report on the existing nomination policies and mechanisms and highlight the best practices.
Furthermore, the Countries and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights could promote research to identify, analyse and cope with the barriers to achieving gender balance across the UN treaty bodies and also, report on the current national best practices.
We believe that High Commissioner for Human Rights Bachelet is in a unique position to urge countries to take concerted action to push for gender parity in the treaty bodies. Familiar with breaking glass ceilings, she was the first executive director of UN Women and the first woman president of Chile. She could make a policy statement giving high priority to the achievement of gender equality in the committees and call for parity in nominations of candidates.
It is paradoxical that the treaty bodies entrusted with upholding the principle of non-discrimination based on sex use a process to select expert members that can result in discrimination. Now that the treaty bodies have been functioning for many years, it is long overdue for countries and the UN Secretariat to put their gender equality commitments into action.
About the authors:
Judge Aruna Devi Narain
Judge Aruna Devi Narain is a judge of the Supreme Court of Mauritius and expert member (2017 – 2022), vice-chairperson, and rapporteur of the UN Committee on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW Committee).
Marcia Vaune Jocelyn Kran O.C. Photography Mike Wakefield.
Ms. Marcia Vaune Jocelyn Kran O.C. is an international lawyer from Canada; who was formerly Director at the UN Human Rights Office in Geneva and Senior Regional Manager at the UN Development Programme in Bangkok and Bratislava, and is a member of the UN Human Rights Committee (2017 – 2024).
Note: Thanks to Ms. Bhavya Mahajan, a lawyer and mediator from India, who helped with the research for the article.
LEO’s Food Festivals, the motto is, share authentic flavours from around the world. This is the First Tunisian Flavors Festival in Amsterdam, the venue was Leonardo Royal Hotel on 24th March 2022.
Hundreds of persons came by to savour the haute Tunisian cuisine and wines. The “Vitruv Restaurant” was bustling, friends of Tunisia and others came to the inaugural evening of the Flavors Festival.
Many of Ambassador Slim Ghariani’s colleagues attended the Food Festival, including the Ambassador of Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Yemen, Rwanda, Panama, Cuba, Korea, Cameroon, Palestine to mention a few. Also present, Diplomats from the Embassy of Belarus, USA, Senegal and others.
Organizers of the event are the Embassy of Tunisia, Diplomat Magazine and Leonardo Royal Hotel Amsterdam. The Tunisian Flavors served as a curtain-raiser for the various countries in the upcoming Food Festivals editions.
Tunisian cuisine seems to be less explored in the Netherlands. With that in mind, the Tunisian Flavors event is where one can delve into Tunisia’s authentic cuisine.
Tunisian Chef Wafik Belaid.
The Embassy has selected celebrity Chefs Wafik Belaid, Mohamed Ali Abouda and Hykel Ben Zaida, to develop a special five-course menu of authentic flavours.
People tend to compare new foods to food items they have eaten before however Tunisian flavours leave you analogy less, it is beyond compare!
The inaugural remarks by the Ambassador of Tunisia H.E. Mr. Slim Ghariani
“It gives me an immense pleasure to welcome you all to the 2022 Edition of the Tunisian Gastronomic Days, jointly organized by the Embassy of Tunisia in The Hague, the Tunisian National Tourism Office Representation in The Netherlands, Diplomatic Magazine, and the Leonardo Royal Hotel Amsterdam. I would like to express to all our partners my high appreciation and my sincere thanks for their tireless efforts and valuable contribution to the accomplishment of this special culinary and artistic event.
H.E. Mrs. Rawan Suliaman, Head of Palestinian Mission and H.E. Ms Sahar Ghanem, Ambassador of Yemen.His Excellency Mr Yeondoo Jeong, Ambassador of Korea and the Ambassador off Tunisia, H.E. Mr. Slim Ghariani.
I would also like to extend my thanks to our three famous Chefs who will be preparing special Tunisian dishes during this event, and the gracious Band “Club Elle” who will embellish our exceptional evening, with traditional and classic Tunisian music, in a festive and joyful atmosphere, as well as to our sponsors who generously supported our Endeavour and enriched our set of prizes for the tombola you will be taking part to later.
Following the success of the previous editions in The Hague, we decided, at the proposal of our partners, to celebrate this year’s gastronomic days in Amsterdam. The main goal is to promote Tunisia as a touristic destination and showcase our cuisine to the residents of the prestigious capital of the Kingdom.
As you may have noticed, the tables are named after some of the most beautiful cities in Tunisia, of which a short presentation can be found on the postcard. If you have not been to Tunisia before, we hope this occasion arouses your curiosity to visit our rich cultural patrimony and historical heritage.
Tunisian Flavors.
May I recall in this context, that Tunisia is totally ready to welcome back tourists from all over the world, especially after the substantial improvement of the sanitary situation related to the corona virus pandemic. The Government has indeed launched, since June 2020, a National Tourism Health Protocol, labeled “Ready and safe”, in line with the World Health Organization guidelines. The vaccination program covered 100% of hotel and tourism staff and around 60% of the total population is completely vaccinated. The entry requirements for travellers were considerably alleviated as of February 15, 2022.
In 2019, Tunisia welcomed about 9.5 million visitors, hailing from the four corners of the globe, eager to explore the diversity of its touristic product and the richness of its cultural heritage. We hope to bring back over 80,000 Dutch tourists per year, a record number in 2019, especially that the resumption of TUI Netherlands’ flights to Tunisia is planned for next month.
Tunisian Flavors.
Thus, I would like to seize this opportunity to publicly express our thanks to the Dutch authorities for last month’s review of the travel advice to Tunisia, allowing the resumption of tourist flows to our country. Similarly, many other European countries had classified Tunisia in the green list of countries with low coronavirus risks.
I avail myself of this very opportunity, to express our appreciation for the Dutch support to the democratic transition and the national economy in Tunisia since the revolution in 2011. We also greatly appreciate the Dutch assistance provided to our country in order to tackle the coronavirus crisis.”
H.E. Ms. Elizabeth Ward Neiman, Ambassador of Panama, H.E. Mr. Riaz Hamidullah, Ambassador of Bangladesh, H.E. Mr. Olivier Jean Patrick Nduhungirehe, Ambassador of Rwanda and H.E. Mr. Suljuk Mustansar Tarar, Ambassador of Pakistan.Dr Christophe Bernasconi,
Secretary General of the Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH) and the Ambassador of Egypt, Mr Hatem Elsayed Mohamed Kamaleldin.
A breakdown of the program, other speakers were: Mr. Mohamed Attia, Director of the Tunisian Tourism Bureau in the Netherlands, he remarked, to present a more varied tourism offer, cultural tourism, wellbeing tourism, Sahara tourism and culinary tourism. These items are increasingly in demand. Dr Mayelinne De Lara, Publisher of Diplomat Magazine, is elated to see the food festivals has landed in Amsterdam also. Mr Eric-Jan Bausch, General Manager of Leonardo Royal Hotel Amsterdam, LEO’s Food Festivals, the motto is: share authentic flavours from around the world. Chef Wafik Belaid, warmly introduced the 5-courses menu.
Tunisian wines.
Before the dinner, guests were treated to tasty Tunisian hors-d’oeuvres and an opportunity to try artisanal fragranced oils and a display of Tunisian condiments.
The mouthwatering five courses meal consisted of Cold starters, Tunisian salads: apple & mint, octopus salad, green pepper salad “michouia”. The main course number 1: couscous with seabass fish. Main course number 2: lamb cooked in a clay pot. The dessert, Trio assida: pistachio, hazelnut, zgougou, tea with pinon. Drinks coffee, tea, soft drinks, Tunisian wines, beer.
Dr Christophe Bernasconi,
Secretary General of the Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH) and H.E. Dr. Dren Doli, Ambassador of the Republic of Kosovo with their spouses.
The 3,4 and 5th tombola prizes were artistic wool board ornaments. However, the 6th tombola Prize was a roundtrip flight Brussels/Tunis/Brussels, offered by the national carrier TUNISAIR.
The final tombola prize was a seven days trip to a four-star Tunis hotel, offered by TUI Tour operator.
What a sublime evening, all the guests left Leonardo Royal Hotel Amsterdam in high spirit. Tunisian trinkets were offered as a token of appreciation.
Tunisian female band “Club Elle”.
Further on the program, live music by the Tunisian female band “Club Elle” animated the evening with their traditional music. A performance by the REMIX Girls Band followed. Next was the drawing of Tombola prizes, the first and second draw resulted in Sejnane dolls.
REMIX Girls Band. Photography by August Zeidman.
The 3,4 and 5th tombola prizes were artistic wool board ornaments. However, the 6th tombola Prize was a roundtrip flight Brussels/Tunis/Brussels, offered by the national carrier TUNISAIR.
The final tombola prize was a seven days trip to a four-star Tunis hotel, offered by TUI Tour operator.
What a sublime evening, all the guests left Leonardo Royal Hotel Amsterdam in high spirit. Tunisian trinkets were offered as a token of appreciation.
One of the winners of the splendid Tunisian Flavours’ opening night. Photography by August Zeidman.
All charges against Finnish Parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen and Bishop Pohjola are unanimously dismissed following high-profile free speech trial
The former Finnish Minister of the Interior, faced three criminal charges for sharing her faith-based beliefs, including on Twitter
ADF (30.03.2022) – https://bit.ly/3DqJ6D5 – A Finnish court has upheld the right to free speech by dismissing all charges against Finnish MP Päivi Räsänen and Bishop Juhana Pohjola. In a unanimous ruling the court concluded that “it is not for the district court to interpret biblical concepts”. The prosecution was ordered to pay more than 60,000 EUR in legal costs and has seven days to appeal the ruling.
The former Minister of the Interior had been charged with “hate speech” for sharing her faith-based views on marriage and sexual ethics, in a 2019 tweet, a 2019 radio debate, and a 2004 pamphlet. The bishop faced charges for publishing Räsänen’s pamphlet for his congregation over 17 years ago. Their case has garnered global media attention this year, as human rights experts voiced concern over the threat this case posed to free speech in Finland.
“I am so grateful the court recognized the threat to free speech and ruled in our favour. I feel a weight has been lifted off my shoulders after being acquitted. Although I am grateful for having had this chance to stand up for freedom of speech, I hope that this ruling will help prevent others from having to go through the same ordeal,” said Päivi Räsänen after her victory.
Christian teachings on trial
The high-profile trial received significant attention, particularly after the prosecution attacked core Christian teachings and cross-examined the bishop and Räsänen on their theology in court. The prosecutor began the first day of the trial by arguing that the case was not about beliefs or the Bible.
She then proceeded to quote Old Testament Bible verses and criticize the phrase “love the sinner, hate the sin”. In their closing statement, the prosecution alleged that the use of the word “sin” can be “harmful” and called for heavy fines in the event of a guilty verdict.
Free speech prevails
Räsänen’s defence, supported by the legal advocacy organization ADF International, argued that finding Räsänen guilty would significantly damage free speech in Finland. What Räsänen said, they argued, was an expression of Christian teaching. The Court recognized that while some may object to Räsänen’s statements, “there must be an overriding social reason for interfering with and restricting freedom of expression.” The Court concluded there was no such justification.
“We welcome the Helsinki District Court’s ruling. This is an important decision, which upholds the fundamental right to freedom of speech in Finland. In a free society, everyone should be allowed to share their beliefs without fear of censorship. This is the foundation of every free and democratic society. Criminalizing speech through so-called ‘hate-speech’ laws shuts down important public debates and poses a grave threat to our democracies,” continued Coleman, author of ‘Censored: How European Hate Speech Laws are Threatening Freedom of Speech’.
International support for free speech
On both days of the trial (24 January and 14 February) crowds gathered outside the Helsinki courthouse to express their support for the politician and the bishop. In Hungary, over 3000 people gathered in front of the Finnish Embassy in Budapest to demonstrate against the charges before the closing arguments were heard.
Räsänen has also received letters of support from many denominations including the International Lutheran Council with Bishops and presidents of Synods from all over the world, the European Evangelical Alliance, Catholic and Pentecostal churches in Lithuania, representatives of the Evangelical, Catholic, Baptist, Pentacostal, Reformed and Unitarian churches in Romania, as well as the Evangelical Church of Macedonia, Christian NGOs in Latvia and other individuals.
Several US Senators penned a letter addressed to Rashad Hussain, US Ambassador-At-Large for International Religious Freedom, expressing their concern over the “alarming” prosecution of Räsänen: “We are greatly concerned that the use of Finnish hate speech law is tantamount to a secular blasphemy law. It could open the door for prosecution of other devout Christians, Muslims, Jews and adherents of other faiths for publicly stating their religious beliefs,” read the letter.
In January, UK MPs filed an Early Day Motion in parliament, highlighting the controversial prosecution and raising concerns about “the potential implications of that case for other countries”.
Trial for a Tweet
Police investigations against Räsänen started in June 2019. As an active member of the Finnish Lutheran church, she had addressed the leadership of her church on Twitter and questioned its official sponsorship of the LGBT event ‘Pride 2019’, accompanied by an image of Bible verses from the New Testament book of Romans. Following this tweet, further investigations against Räsänen were launched, going back to a church pamphlet Räsänen wrote almost 20 years ago. In the last two years, Räsänen attended several lengthy police interrogations about her Christian beliefs – including being frequently asked by the police to explain her understanding of the Bible.
In April 2021, Finland’s Prosecutor General had brought three criminal charges against Räsänen. Two of the three charges Räsänen faced had come after the police made strong recommendations not to continue the prosecution. Räsänen’s statements also did not violate the policies of Twitter or the national broadcaster, which is why they remained freely available on their platforms. The Helsinki District Court has now acquitted Räsänen of all charges.
Räsänen has served as a Finnish Member of Parliament since 1995. From 2004-2015 she was chair of the Christian Democrats and from 2011-2015 she was the Minister of the Interior. During this time, she held responsibility for church affairs in Finland.
Photo: Päivi Räsänen, Finland’s interior minister from 2011 to 2015. | Courtesy of ADF International.
On February 24 2022, around 5 AM Moscow time, on Vladimir Putin’s order the Russian army launched an unprovoked war against Ukraine.
There is no chance for us to fall into Kremlin’s propagandistic trap and accept circumventing the term war for this aggression and use Moscow’s expression.
The re-invasion Russia launched on ground, from the air and from the sea is the largest attack of a state against another state in Europe after the WWII. The 2014 invasion should not be frogotten and that is why we used the term re-invasion which is, otherwise, coming across in the international media.
From its military dimension, the conflict became manifest in the economic, diplomatic, media and social fields in the countries directly involved, yet with reverberations in almost all of the world’s countries.
The present approach will deal predominantly with the military aspects while not neglecting the essential aspects in other fields.
Why did Russia attack Ukraine?
Ever since president Putin delivered his speech at the 2007 Munich Security Conference, it was quite obvious that Russia would not accept the geopolitical developments that followed the fall of the Berlin Wall and will try to re-establish its lost sphere of influence especially in Europe. Soon, in August 2008, the conflict in Georgia followed with almost no reactions from the Western democracies and that encouraged Moscow to annex Crimea in 2014 and to partially occupy regions in eastern Ukraine, regions which were later on declared as separatist Donetsk and Lugansk republics. That time too, the international community’s reaction was rather feeble, with superficial sanctions against the said aggression.
It is possible that encouraged by that reaction and most probably miscalculating the consequences of launcing the war against Ukraine, as well as of Ukraine’s internal situation, Putin believed he could replicate in the whole of Ukraine the situation he was met with in Crimea and could set up a pro- Muscovite puppet regime within days from launching the offensive.
Putin made the decision to attack Ukraine seeing the demarches the country has made to join the EU and NATO, although they were already provided for in the 2019 Ukrainian constitution.
The way the conflict unfolds
However, after the first day of war, the Russian ground forces missed the initial moment of the offensive due to lack of fuel (some unconfirmed enough sources speak of the Russian military bartering fuel for alcohol), of ammunition and even of food supplies. It is also assessed that the first echelon of the Russian troops included not only poorly trained military but also an equally poor leadership.
The offensive was simultaneously launched on four directions:
Towards Kyiv (around 2,8 mil. inhabitants) from Belarus (circa 90 km north) and from further east, from the Russian territory;
Towards Harkiv, Ukraine’s second city (around 1,4 mil. inhabitants) from the east, from the Russian territory, less than 30 km from the Russian border;
From the south, from Crimea and the Black Sea, pursuing the closure of the Ukrainian sea shore of the Black Sea by achieving the land connection between Russia and Crimea and by occupying Odessa (Ukraine’s third city, with more than 1 mil. inhabitants).
The land offensive started simultaneously with the launching of 160 missiles from the ground, from the air and from the sea as well as with two aviation attack waves (around 80 bombers and escort fighter jets), namely in total 400 attacks in the first 24 hours which targetted 15 commandments and command centers, 18 air defense units, 11 airfields and six military bases.
At the end of the first fighting day, the Snake Island (0,15 Km2) , which is 45 km far from the Romanian sea shore, was occupied. The Ukrainian garrison there (some 15 military) was captured and it was initially announced that the military there were killed. This very action proves the importance Russia attaches to the tiny island. The satellite images show that a Russian military navy entered the island’s tiny port.
From unofficial sources, I can say that before the invasion started, there was a proposal to the American side that NATO set up a radar and a symbolic garrison on the island in order to protect it and avoid its occupation, a proposal which was rejected by the US.
The Russian special forces in uniforms and civilian clothes have been spoted in Kyiv’s center while paratroopers landing from helicopters tried to occupy the Hostomel airport situated to the north-west of the capital. Initially, the Russian forces succeeded in occupying the airport, but at the end of the fighting day the Ukrainian forces resumed the control of the objective.
With the exception of long distance missiles strikes, almost all the initial targets of the invasion were missed. Ukraine’s air defence was not totally annihilated and not all of the airfields were disabled. The Ukrainian forces maintained, to a large extent, their freedom of movement and kept their positions.
Russian invasion of Ukraine 28/2/ 2022 / 12:00 AM (Est)
The Ukrainian reserves and its territorial defenses mobilised in no time. The Russian landing troops and the special forces placed deeply into the Ukrainian territory were isolated from the troops deployed on the front and re-supplying the former, especially with ammunition, was made more difficult.
From the way the operations were unfolding, it was clear that Russia did not succeed to integrate in the best circumstances some modern warfare instruments – electronic, cyber and outer space ones into the terrestrial offensive.
Around 150,000 Russian military took part initially to the invasion (almost 200 batallions), i.e. an important force, but launching operations on 15 different directions meant diminishing the strength on each and every offensive direction. Most probably, the Russian planers underestimated the resistance of the Ukrainian army.
We present below the situation and the evolution of the Russian controlled territory two weeks after the the invasion started:
06/03/ 2022 Ukraine.
We will not enter the details concerning the military operations and especially the losses mentioned by each side as we keep in mind a quotation saying that “truth is the first to die in case of war”, but from the way the operations were carried out to date, some important conclusions may be drawn:
The Ukrainian army achieved important progress in training and equipping, as compared to the situation in 2014 and put up a resistantce that the invading army did not expect;
The defense was organized on areas enjoying an extended command independence and logistic flexibility as compared to the ultra-centralised command of the Russian army;
The anti-tank and air defense equipment sent to Kyiv was extremely efficient against the Russian tanks, fighter jets and helicopters;
The poor command of the Russian troops of the first echelon and presumably the low morale of the latter made the higher military leadership of the invasion decide sending Russian generals close to the contact line and that explains the fact that, by March 26, the Ukrainian snipers killed around 15 high ranking Russian military among whom six generals. It is presumed that they were spoted as a result of the non observance of communication rules and used their mobile phones for getting in touch with certain subordinates;
Russia was unable to obtain air supremacy over the entire Ukrainian territory and most likely it does not have enough highly trained pilots ready for such a large scale conflict;
As of March 19 and 20, Russia started using Kinjal and Kaliber hypersonic missiles launched from the Caspian Sea, the Black Sea and from the air space for striking certain tactical targets (ammunition and fuel depots, a training center for the Ukrainian special forces and probably mercenaries). That demonstrate president Putin’s desire to obtain as qiuckly as possible important results in the offensive operation. According to certain (not fully confirmed) reports, an important percentage (even more than 50%) of the launched cruise missiles did not explode on their targets;
I consider that Ukraine benefits too from important intelligence concerning the deployment and the movement of the Russian invading forces supplied by satellites and other means by certain NATO states;
Ukraine’s counterintelligence services in general and the military ones in particular succeeded after 2014 in countering the FSB and GRU actions both within the local political class and especially within the Ukrainian army (in 2014 Ukraine had to disband the 15 Airborne Brigade which was accused of treason);
After the first three weeks since launching the invasion, a certain change in the share of the targets hit by the Russian missiles and aviation is noticed as they aim at diminishing the capacities of supply and communications and of the Ukrainian troops movements; also, the troops positioned on the north fringes of Kyiv started engineering works, sign that the extended offensive on the capital is not imminent.
An interesting issue that is worth mentioning is that of the foreign mercenaries. Early as February 27, Ukraine appealed to foreign fighters to join a so-called “Foreign Legion”. An important number of volunteers crowded the Ukrainian embassies abroad and around 20,000 people of 52 countries offered their services. Their status within the Ukrainian army is not known and Kyiv promised them Ukrainian citizenship, social incentives and an unrevealed salary. It seems that 3,000 Americans, 1,000 Canadians, 600 Czechs, 100 Scots as well as Georgians, Polish, Germans, Israelis and others enlisted already. According to certain sources, after March 20, the number of candidates decreased sharply and almost no new volunteers applied.
On March 11, president Vladimir Putin asked the minister of defense Sergei Shoigu to facilitate the transit of the military from the Middle East wishing to fight in Ukraine on Russia’s side. 16,000 Syrian paramilitary volunteers and members of the 5th Corps are mentioned among those wishing to enlist. It is possible that fighters of the Lebanese Hezbollah and of Hamas join the Syrian volunteers. Some other mercenaries as well could have been recruited from Libya according to an understanding reached during the recent visit to Moscow of the Libyan General Khalifa Haftar. The average payment of these fighters is estimated between 300 and 500 $/month and is to be paid from the Russian budget.
We do not believe that the mercenaries’ participation, on either side, could have an important influence on the way the military operations are carried out as they are disadvantaged by the fact they do not know the ground, the language and will have probably major logistical and cultural problems.
Russia mercenaries in Ukraina.
From the information and the stands taken by the two sides, from the assessments and analyses of as objective as possible sources, it is clearer and clearer that at the end of the first month of the invasion Russia will finish the invasion and will withdraw from most of the occupied territories, an operation that will be completed the latest around May 7 2022. A first signal to that end was conveyed on March 25 2022 by the speech of the head of the Main Operational Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Federation Army, Colonel Gen. Serghei Rudskoy.
It is likely that in the coming weeks, the Russian forces will focus on surrounding the Ukrainian group of forces situated close to the west of the separatist regions and securing a terrestrial connection of the Sea of Azov shore and Crimea. General Rudskoy’s speech offers already a first glance on the Russian justification for the coming to an end, in a near future, of the invasion of Ukraine indeed by proclaiming the “victory” – the achievement of the objecives set at the beginning of the conflict.
Assessed Control of Terrain in Ukraine and Main Russian Maneuver Axes as of March 26, 2022, 3:00 PM ET
Sanctions, economic impact, peace negotiations
Russia’s military actions had nevertheless efects and reprecussions that we believe the Kremlin did not assess to their full magnitude and that lead to a reinforcement of the democratic Europe’s cohesion and unity and of the transatlantic relations.
Sanctions and their economic impact
The sanctions are penalties imposed by a country to another country to stop the latter to act aggresively or to break the international law. In this case, the sanctions Russia is subject to are the most severe among those applied so far to Moscow and a great number of countries imposed them. We mention some of them:
Banning the export of dual use (civilian and military) goods, including the spare parts for vehicles imposed by the EU, US and Great Britain;
Banning the flights of all Russian companies in the air space of the EU, US and Great Britain (which banned also the private charters leased by Russia);
The EU, US and Great Britain applied sanctions to more than 1,000 individuals and companies generically designated as oligarchs, considered close associates to the Kremlin; the properties belonging to president Vladimir Putin and to the minister of Foreign Affairs Serghei Lavrov were frozen;
The US banned oil and gas imports from Russia while the Great Britain will cease importing Russian oil by the end of 2022; The EU declared it will move to alternate energy sources and will become independent from the energy Russia supplies before 2030. During the recent visit of president Biden to Europe, it has been agreed that the US supply around 50 billion cubic meter of liquefied gas to the EU;
Germany suspended for the time being the formalities for the commission of North Stream 2;
Among the financial sanctions, we mention the freeze of the assets of the Central Bank of Russia, amounting to 630 billion dollars, a step that caused a ruble’s devaluation by 22% since the beginning of 2022, an increase of prices of the imported goods and an inflation of 14%;
Certain Russian Banks were excluded from the international financial system SWIFT.
It is worth mentioning that information coming recently from Great Britain stresses that if Russia withdraws its invasion troops, London (Londongrad as it is also named due to the presence there of a great number of Russian oligarchs) will lift the sanctions imposed on Moscow.
President Putin declared that the unfriendly nations will be obliged to pay for gas imports from Russia in rubles in order to help the recovery of the national currency.
Russia banned the export of around 200 goods till the end of 2022 including telecom and medical products, vehicles, food and agricultural produce, electric equipment and timber. Other retaliatory steps have been also taken in the financial and banking fields.
We do express our hope that Europe drew the real conclusions and will succeed in escaping the „Russian energy trap” and do not repeat the Nabucco experience, a project initiated in 2002, agreed upon in 2009 and then abandoned in 2013 mainly due to political reasons.
Peace negotiations
The peace negotiantions started on February 28, a few days after the attack begun, initially in physical form and continued on March 3 and 7 on the Belarusian territory, and after that on line at experts’ level. A breakthrough was Turkey’s facilitating a meeting at the level of the foreign ministers of the two countries and the negotiations took place in Antalya under the auspices of the Antalya Diplomacy Forum on March 10 with the participation of the Turkish minister of Foreign Affairs, Mevlut Cavusoglu. Although no progress was registered this time, it was very clear from the Russian minister of Foreign Affairs Serghei Lavrov’s answers at the press conference organized after the meeting that in the Kremlin’s opinion, it is not about a Russia-Ukraine conflict but about a Russia conflict with the West in which the invasion of Ukraine is just a stage.
A pecularity of these negotiations is that the Russian side never accepted any cease fire during the talks.
The Ukrainian president Volodimir Zelensky expressed repeatedly his readiness of meeting and negotiating with president Vladimir Putin, a proposal the Russian side did not accept. The Kremlin’s reply was, of course, that such a meeting would take place when Kyiv accepts Moscow’s conditions. An interesting nuance included in the Ukrainian president’s offer for negotiations is his statement that any agreed upon understanding which will include possible territorial or of other nature important alterations contradicting the provisions of the constitution in force should be subject to a referendum in order to be enforced.
Russia’s main four conditionalities are: An Ukraine declaration of neutrality; the formal agreement that the Crimean Peninsula, annexed by Russia in 2014, is Russian territory and that the Donbas region controlled by the Russian separatists in Eastern Ukraine is independent; Ukraine’s demilitarisation; lifting the Western sanctions imposed on Russia. As far as Ukraine is concerned, it seems the country is ready to accept some of these requests including giving up to joining NATO and some territorial compromises.
A new round of negotiations is taking place in physical form in Istanbul on March 29 and 30. Both Turkey and Israel hope of being able to successfully mediate the negotiations, but I think that probably the informal negotiations among the Russian and the Ukrainian oligarchs will be much more effective.
Brief conclusions
I think Putin overestimated the possibilities of the Russian army of achieving the established strategic political objectives while underestimating, at the same time, Ukraine’s capacity of resisting Russia’s plans. Concomitantly, it could be about a mistake in managing the relation between the political leadership and the intelligence services agencies, although it is unlikely that the Russian intelligence services were so wrong in their getting acquainted and reporting the situation in Ukraine.
The military conclusions will be indeed interesting especially after the war operations end, yet it is already obvious that a particular higher attention will be paid to cyber actions and UAVs, to a greater interaction between terrestial and spacial, to an increased role of the missiles to the detriment of artillery, to the importance of small forces possessing a high fire power and mobility, to decentralizing the command and so on. Not in the least, the psychological training of troops should gain more and more in importance.
Coming back to a wider framework, the conflict in Ukraine highlights the fact that in what concerns the dispute between Huntington and Fukuyama on the humankind’s future, it seems that the former (with whom I had long discussions at Harvard in the summer of 2001) was right, less in what concerns the border he traced between the two civilisations and which, I believe, is much farther to the east of Romania. We are living into a world of ethnical conflicts and civilizational confrontations which is shaping the future otherwise than the much more optimistic way (liberty, democracy, market economy and secularisation of cultures) foreseen by Fukuyama.
I further conclude that Social Media become an active player in geopolitics. Brexit, Trump, pandemic and now the war in Ukraine, all had a big component of influencing, via the platforms of the big tech companies which were clearly positioned on a certain side. I remind that the Big 5, who are governing the world now are: Pharma, Defense, Oil, Tech, Banks. Let us not forget about the banks as someone has to lend/manage trillions. Look for who are those who fund the conflicts for a better understanding.
An old proverb says that when two quarrel, the third wins. Such is now the case in the fight between Kyiv (which, it should be made clear, is historically the craddle of the Russian civilization, something which, in equally clear terms, cannot represent in any case a justification for the Russian invasion) and Moscow, as neither of the two belligerents will win, nor the EU, but the US and China.
I think that under such complex circumstances, we have to position ourselves in such a way that we capitalize best our advantages, to stress our possibilities and prove loyalty towards the strategic partners, without neglecting the national interests. Politically, as it is the case in the military field, one should act rapidly, decisevly and especially in a clever way. The political corectness, a much used and dear term of today politicians, has proved its limits and the return to Real Politik could represent a clever solution of the contemporary political world.
