For the first time in history, the Lords of the Ecumenical Patriarchate traveled to Athens to participate in the 4th International Conference of Lords for Religious Freedom. The conference, held from May 26-28, 2024, focused on human rights, democracy, and religious freedom.
The keynote speaker on the second day was the 70th U.S. Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, who emphasized the strong relationship he and his family have with the Orthodox community in the United States. He highlighted the personality of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, whom he visited in Istanbul despite the “mild reactions of Turkey, to put it diplomatically.”
Referring to the Russian Orthodox Church, he stated, “This war is not holy, it is not religious. It is a war of conquest. We must speak the language of truth, as the Ecumenical Patriarch did in 2019 when he granted the Tome of Autocephaly to the Ukrainians.”
Pompeo also recounted an incident when there was disagreement within the U.S. Department of State about issuing a statement on the matter. He shared, “Mike, it’s none of our business; it’s an internal ecclesiastical matter between Russia and Ukraine. But no. America had an obligation to do so. The U.S. continues to support Ukraine. And it is the government in Moscow, not Kyiv, that is using the Church to justify the war. Citizens deserve better than this.”
Mike Pompeo with Lords of the Ecumenical Patriarchate Συνεχιζεται σημερα για 2η μερα το συνεδριο των Αρχοντων του Οικουμενικου Πατριαρχειου στο Ζαππειο Μεγαρο–
Regarding the conversion of the Chora Monastery into a mosque in Constantinople, he emphasized that it is a holy place, a historical site, and a unique UNESCO monument. “There is no reason to do this,” he stated, adding that this move is a challenge, and President Erdogan himself is a challenge: “This action reduces the freedom of Turkish citizens.” He also mentioned that the Trump administration had made it clear to Turkey that such a move is unacceptable, as it opposes the basic principles of the European Union, which Ankara wants to join, as well as the idea of its participation in NATO.
Meeting with Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis
The former U.S. Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, met with Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis in Athens, according to diplomatic sources. It is worth noting that on September 29, 2020, Mr. Mitsotakis and his wife, Mareva, hosted the then-Secretary of State and his wife, Susan Pompeo, at their home in Chania. The two men discussed various topics, particularly developments in the U.S. and globally, and agreed to stay in touch.
Sustainable development and cooperation for disaster resilience – inclusive pathways with civil society, governments and more: focus on Latin America and the Caribbean
By Beatrice Levorato Barsotti
On the 12th of June 2024, 15 embassies, representatives of international organizations, among which the IOM and Save the Children, numerous NGOs [BL1] , gathered for the 15th meeting of The Hague Roundtable on Climate and Security, held at the International Institute of Social Studies (ISS), in The Hague. The Roundtable, focused on Latin America and the Caribbean, was organized in collaboration with, ISS Humanitarian Studies Centre (HSC) and The Hague Humanity Hub.
The meeting was characterized by an action-based dialogue, and a free flow of opinions, in which international representatives had the opportunity to exchange views and information with experts on the field.
The session was opened by the organizer and founder of The Hague Roundtable, Matt Luna, and the co-moderator, Dr. Thea Hilhorst, Professor of Humanitarian Studies at the ISS. Following the warm introduction from the Rector of the Institute – Prof. Dr. Ruard Ganzevoort, the panel discussions were opened by Ronald Jackson, Head of the Disaster Risk Reduction and Recovery for Building Resilience department at the UNDP in Geneva.
Mr. Jackson, formerly the Head of the Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency (CDEMA), had already participated in a 2019 Roundtable via online while on a hurricane recovery mission in the Caribbean. This year, the Head of the UNDP DRR Department delivered a presentation titled “Bridging the Silos,” discussing the role of multilateralism in resilience building and how risk informs future developments. Mr. Jackson emphasized that multilateralism is the fundamental cornerstone for addressing global challenges, particularly in risk reduction management. He shared an enlightening reflection on our perception of resilience, questioning whether we aim to make the climate resilient or ourselves resilient to the climate.
After evaluating current scenarios and challenges in DRR, and linking them to the significance of multilateralism, Mr. Jackson outlined several challenges to the multilateral system, including the perceived inability to mobilize global opinion, develop shared political will, and provide timely responses to complex issues. Other challenges he noted were multiple and siloed global development frameworks, nation-first policies, funding architectures, systemic risks, and the competition for resources, which contributes to a lack of coherence in international institutions.
In this difficult scenario, Mr. Jackson emphasised the positive efforts fostered by the UN, such as the holistic Agenda 2030. He stressed the importance of aligning policies with the SDGs to addressing systemic risks and building resilience through a bottom-up approach. Mr. Jackson underscored the need for innovative cooperation among states, stakeholders, and various actors.
He concluded by emphasizing the importance of strengthening multilateralism, not through radical restructuring, but through collective action towards shared objectives. Creating seamless, objective-driven processes can yield quicker, resilience-focused development. Finally, embracing, encouraging, and strengthening multilateral efforts is paramount to addressing global challenges effectively, fostering sustainable development, and enhancing collective resilience against future risks.
Dr. Murat Arsel, Professor of Political Economy of Sustainable Development at ISS, discussed the intersection of sustainability, development, and political ecology, with a particular focus on his work in Latin America and the Amazon region. His presentation began with a striking image of a town in Ecuador, where the majority of workers are employed in the oil sector. This dependency creates a dangerous reliance on the industry and poses a significant challenge for the green transition.
Dr. Arsel highlighted the difficulty of creating a form of capitalism that does not depend on fossil fuels, emphasizing that ‘renewable capitalism’ is both possible and already emerging. In the context of a post-climate change world, numerous questions must be analyzed. Firstly, what happens when oil production ceases? How can dwindling revenues be rapidly replaced? For countries like Nigeria and Ecuador, which are highly dependent on oil resources, Dr. Arsel suggested compensation as a potential solution—compensating these countries in exchange for halting extraction. He also addressed the risks of social conflict arising from the transition and the geopolitical challenges posed by China’s significant competition in the sector.
Dr. Farhad Mukhtarov, Asst. Professor of Public Policy and Governance at ISS, discussed the opportunities and pitfalls of exporting technologies and expertise in water management for climate adaptation, with a focus on COP29. He emphasized the dilemmas and choices faced by practitioners involved in foreign policy related to water, climate, and security. Dr. Mukhtarov advocated for shifting from merely transferring expertise to co-creating change, highlighting the need to transform the Dutch water sector by fostering greater social inclusivity in internationally funded projects (Bliss, 2024).
Dr. Mukhtarov stressed the need for reflexivity and humility, urging practitioners to be conscious of power relationships and dynamics within their teams. He called for a different approach to utilizing and communicating knowledge—one that emphasizes empathy and acknowledges local wisdoms to foster trust.
He argued that these actions require critical listening, mindfulness of one’s responses, and the cultivation of reflexivity and curiosity in working with others. By adopting this approach, transferring expertise becomes translating, positioning both the Netherlands and the recipient countries as co-authors in a true shift from transferring expertise to co-creating change.
Meike van Ginneken, the Netherlands Water Envoy, contributed to The Hague Roundtable on Climate & Security via online video. Van Ginneken underscored the critical role of transboundary water cooperation, highlighting the importance of dialogue, conflict resolution mechanisms, and trust-building during peacetime. She pointed to the profound impact of climate change on water resources and the increasing potential for water-related conflicts, stressing the urgent need to strengthen transboundary water management.
In her presentation, Van Ginneken discussed the Netherlands’ ongoing collaboration with international partners, including the United Nations and the World Bank, to address the complex challenges of transboundary water management and support sustainable development. She emphasized the necessity of collaboration, knowledge sharing, and coalition-building to effectively tackle these global challenges.
Van Ginneken’s contributions reflected the Netherlands’ deep commitment to inclusive and sustainable climate action.
Following the panel discussion, H.E. Mr. Rahman Mustafayev, the Ambassador of Azerbaijan to the Netherlands, interveened and talked about the upcoming COP29, that will be hosted in Baku, Azerbaijan, this November. The ambassador outlined the dyanmics and work behind the preparation for the COP29.
As the host country, Azerbaijan has taken significant steps in preparation for the conference. Initially, before June, the focus was on learning and studying, involving extensive meetings with various countries, delegations, private sectors, social societies, and financial institutions. Since June, the second phase has emphasized interaction and finding common ground among the 198 countries and over 20 international organizations and groups involved, despite often facing difficult and contrasting positions.
The ambassador noticed how the urgency of the climate crisis is underscored by May 2024 being the hottest May on record, with unprecedented temperatures over the last 12 months. From a financial perspective, H.E. noted that despite substantial financial commitments, including an initial target of $100 billion by 2020 set in Copenhagen and a current goal of $2 trillion, investments in African countries continue to be perceived as high risk. Azerbaijan is also focusing on collaboration with small islands, addressing their critical survival issues. Beyond fostering dialogue and bridging countries, Azerbaijan aims to lead by example, targeting the achievement of renewable energy goals by 2027. This shift to green energy, currently funded by the EU, involves collaboration with Georgia, Hungary, and other partners.
After the panel discussion, participants were divided into breakout groups to focus on various critical aspects of sustainability and climate resilience. These groups explored 1) climate justice and the role of civil society, 2) feminist foreign policy in diplomacy for resilience development and 3) resilience and diplomacy action across regions and sectors.
The event concluded with a networking reception, reinforcing the collaborative spirit of the day. A key objective of the Roundtable on Climate and Security is to gather the opinions and voices of international communities. Matt Luna, of The Hague Roundtable, actively participates in COP events and will be attending COP29 in Azerbaijan this year. Thus, the Roundtable serves not only as a platform for knowledge exchange and discussion but also as a crucial forum for expressing diverse viewpoints. It is an integral part of the democratic process that characterizes the COPs on climate.
Note that the 16th Hague Roundtable on Climate & Security is scheduled for 18 September on “Climate Chaos and Law Enforcement” at The Hague University of Applied Sciences. Expression of interest in attending can be sent through the Roundtable contact page.
For More Information / Sources
Bliss, ISS Blog. “From Transferring Expertise to Co-Creating Change – the Dutch Water Sector Needs a Transformation.” Bliss, May 13, 2024. https://issblog.nl/2024/05/13/from-transferring-expertise-to-co-creating-change-the-dutch-water-sector-needs-a-transformation/.
[BL1]Presence: Embassy of Colombia, Municiaplity of The Hague, Embassy of Costa Rica, Embassy of Chile, Humanitarian Studies Centre, Guatemala, Panama, Embassy of Canada, Swedish Embassy, Turkish Embassy, Italian Embassy, The Hague Univeristy of Applied Scieces, Government of Netherlands, Climate Security Program for The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies, IOM, Embassy of Tanzania, Embassy of Spain, Institute of Landscape Studies from Zurich, Save the Children International, (ISS representatives…), The Hague Humanitarian Centre, Ambassador of Azerbaijan
The first impression you get when you meet her is that of a jovial, friendly and optimistic woman who is always on the move. That’s how I met her many years ago, when we were both living in Berlin.
Our initial conversation, I remember well, was about Bucharest, my hometown. It was the first thing we had in common, the memories of a city that we both had lived in before. But later we discovered that there were many other things that connected us.
She is Petia Heinze, born in Sofia, Bulgaria, who travelled the world for the last 34 years, together with her German diplomat husband. Bonn, Brussels, Bucharest, New York, Zagreb, Berlin, London, were cities she called in turn ‘HOME’.
‘I was alongside my husband everywhere, except for Moscow, because of the brutal war that Russia waged against Ukraine. I could neither rationally nor morally come to terms with this situation and live a quiet diplomatic life there’, she confesses. But then she adds: ‘of all my posts so far, I have been happiest in Brussels‘.
Brussels, the city I call ‘home’ these days, another thing we have in common… She tells me she completed her PhD, worked for the EU Commission, and also had her first child in the Belgian capital.
She adds with an unmistakable mixture of fine humor and intelligence, which I noticed in her from the very beginning: ‘when people ask me about my background, I always tell them that I am one of those political scientists who graduated during Perestroika in a socialist country, observed and participated in the difficult and dramatic change of an unfortunate system. What better political training than to see an ideology collapse and its political-economic system implode? I worked during those extremely challenging times as a PR in the election campaign for the Grand National Assembly, then as a marketing and advertising specialist in a new democratic newspaper, later as a correspondent for a national radio, an advisor/expert on EU Phare programs, but most of all as a manager of the Heinze family.‘
Last part sounds familiar? Aren’t we all first and foremost successful managers of the most complex corporation: our own family?
‘The hardest time for me in my diplomatic life was when the children came along, with all the challenges that popped up, especially with the frequent changes of culture, language and environment, education system or healthcare. They became my top priority. The rapid building of new infrastructures in different countries was my main focus, to ensure their positive educational development and especially the psychological support they needed. Оften enough, this ‘job’ requires extraordinary efforts, strong nerves and infinite patience from us, the family managers.‘
‘However, very often in the whirlpool of all these changes and challenges of life, we forget ourselves; we forget that if the engine breaks down, the car stops. And basically we are that engine in our families. When we are healthy physically and mentally, our family is healthy. Remember it and seek help if you need it! We have been fortunate though, that supporting the families of German diplomats is a top priority for our German Foreign Ministry and we have always received strong support when needed.‘
She recently added another city to her diplomatic life map: Ashgabat, the capital and largest city of Turkmenistan. To her, it is a new opportunity to discover and learn about people and new places.
‘In addition to the love for my husband, which made me follow him during his diplomatic work and give up a professional career of my own, the opportunity to personally experience and immerse myself in other cultures and worlds, to meet new people and make new friends was another reason to live this kind of life. To this I must add that diplomatic life is associated with both pleasant and unpleasant challenges, which require a certain mental preparation, ability to adapt to new conditions, readiness to acquire new knowledge, but also a lot of humor. To young spouses of diplomats out there, my only advice is to empty the basket of prejudices and biases, to be open to the world and be patient. There is always a solution to everything!’
I asked her about the proudest moment of her life… and I got another piece of Petia’s humor, combined with her realistic approach: ‘I haven’t thought about what I’m most proud of, no one around me has won a Nobel Peace Prize yet, but I am surely proud to have kept my family together all these years and to have raised my children to be respectful of others, empathetic and helpful, open to new challenges and always eager to learn more.’
This is something more than any Nobel Prize moment for any proud parent, indeed!
The terrible war in Ukraine has lasted now for nearly 2 and a half years. Russia invaded Ukraine and wages a modern and murderous war. The West is fully behind Ukraine, does provide loads of weapons and has introduced various sanctions against the aggressor, Russia. It seems that after a difficult period for Ukraine, the chances are now turning with the help of the weaponry provided by the US and European partners. The F -16 aeroplanes are still to enter the frame, so there can be hope of some positive military developments for Ukraine in the near future.
Yet, the defining question at this point in time should not only be a military one, but a diplomatic one as well. When will be the time that both sides in this conflict will decide to call it a day? In other words, the question is whether and when a cease fire can be obtained followed by talks about the terms of a lasting peace agreement.
The western leaders, e.g. NATO members understandably feel it is not their task to impose the right moment on the beleaguered Ukrainians. At the same time and in a covert way they must be looking at a solution which ends the hostilities and which can be seen as acceptable under the circumstances. Let’s take a look at what could be necessary to get to this point.
First – this war can never stop while the people of Ukraine are left in an uncertain situation. Some form of a security arrangement for Ukraine will have to be put in place. Best would be an instant membership of EU and in future of NATO for the non-occupied part of Ukraine, but that will only be possible if the war has come to an end. Clearly, a main point is what kind of response Russia will provide to a NATO membership of Ukraine. However, it is simply not conceivable to end this conflict and just wait for the following one to happen along the same pattern. Therefore, I think that NATO cannot do anything else than make a full promise that Ukraine will be admitted as regular member, as soon as the situation permits and all Allies agree. “We reaffirm our unwavering solidarity with the people of Ukraine in the heroic defence of their nation, their land and our shared values”, NATO said at the recent Washington Summit of NATO at 75. It was stated that the path to a future NATO membership is irreversible. This means that Ukraine will be protected by its allies in case of a renewed outside aggression, but this will not be tomorrow.
Second – Ukraine will have to accept that part of its territory remains occupied by Russia for the time being. Which part that is depends on further Ukrainian military successes. It is certain however that Russia will hang on the gains they have already made in Crimea and the Donbas region, where Russian is the dominant language and affiliation. Diplomats will have to find the right concept and wording for this – admittedly unfortunate – state of affairs, may be including a buffer zone. In my view it is unthinkable that Russia will step back from the surface under its control, at best there could be an attempt to hold a public poll which way the local population would like to go. In the interest of peace, Ukraine will have to consider making concessions in some form to the central concept of territorial integrity .
Third – there has to be an agreement on the rights of the minorities in the contested regions, and notably the protection of spoken and written languages and culture. Much along the lines of the Minsk agreements. An often heard pretext of the Russian invasion originated inter alia in the non-fulfilment of the terms of Minsk. The promised constitutional reform of Ukraine was not followed up. The obligation to use the Ukrainian language in all parts of the country has no doubt added to cultural tensions.
There is another side to the outcome of the war, certainly seen from the prism of the Hague as the world’s Legal Capital. The International Criminal Court has launched an arrest warrant against the leader of Russia, Vladimir Putin. This arrest warrant has to remain in place, as it is the only visible expression of the indignation of the world at large about the atrocities caused by Russian troops and their leaders, “no impunity” as the central notion. Remember that Milosevic was accused and prosecuted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia ICTY, notwithstanding that as a head of state he had been a negotiating partner for the Dayton peace arrangements in that region. Furthermore, several cases between Ukraine and Russia are still pending before the International Court of Justice, also headquartered in The Hague.
In summary, I am not directly hopeful that this form of thinking will get to the finish line any time soon. But we should not accept that the war in Ukraine drags on and on, without attempts to find a reasonable common ground. Former SG of NATO Jaap de Hoop Scheffer suggested on Dutch TV that an international mediator of grand stature should be asked to unlock the current situation. Someone like the prime minister of India, mr Narendra Modi. And Modi happens to be heading to Kyiv in August, I just read in the press…..
Steven van Hoogstraten – See also The Art of Making Peace. Lessons Learned from Peace Treaties, co-edited by S. van Hoogstraten, N. Schrijver O. Spijkers and A. de Jong (Leiden: Brill, 2017), 238 p.
Diplomat Magazine a récemment conduit une entrevue fascinante avec la Directrice des Alliances Françaises aux Pays-Bas, Mme Helene Pichon. Nous explorons ici son parcours international, l’importance de la langue française aux Pays-Bas, et les initiatives mises en place pour promouvoir l’apprentissage du français parmi les diplomates et les professionnels internationaux.
Mme Pichon, la Directrice des Alliances Françaises aux Pays-Bas a débuté son parcours international à l’âge de 18 ans avec un premier stage au ministère de l’Europe et des Affaires Étrangères au sein de la direction des Affaires Francophones, sous la direction d’Alain Decaux, alors ministre délégué chargé de la Francophonie. Elle a ensuite réalisé plusieurs stages au sein de ce Ministère, notamment au sein des directions des Affaires Européennes, des Affaires Africaines et Malgaches, et à Beyrouth, Liban.
Sa passion pour les relations internationales l’a conduite à servir la Mission de la République de Corée auprès des Nations Unies à Genève et à rejoindre son conjoint, Ambassadeur de France auprès du Royaume de Bahreïn. Par la suite, elle a dirigé l’Alliance Française de Cork en Irlande avant d’intégrer le Centre d’Étude et de Prospective Stratégique, un think-tank à vocation internationale. Tout au long de son parcours, elle a été convaincue que tisser des liens entre les nations et les cultures est la plus belle des professions, une conviction partagée par de nombreux lecteurs de Diplomat Magazine.
Garden Party Ambassade de France avec Richard Schreurs, Président de l’Alliance Française de La Haye. Droits sur les photos @Leslie HONDEBRINK-HERMER.
En qualité de Directrice des Alliances Françaises aux Pays-Bas, elle est au cœur d’actions de la promotion de la langue française. Le réseau des Alliances Françaises aux Pays-Bas, composé de 31 antennes, est dynamique et dense, en partie grâce à l’amour du français ancré dans l’histoire du pays et à sa proximité géographique avec la Belgique et la France. “Les Pays-Bas accueillent des ressortissants de diverses origines, avides d’apprendre la langue de Molière. La Haye, surnommée “la Genève du Nord”, abrite de nombreuses organisations internationales où le français est souvent utilisé comme langue de travail officielle, notamment à la Cour Internationale de Justice. L’Alliance Française de La Haye soutient cette pluralité linguistique grâce à une équipe de professeurs spécialisés et à divers mécanismes de financement mis à disposition des organisations internationales par le gouvernement français et l’Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie.”
“Pour les diplomates néerlandais et étrangers basés à La Haye, maîtriser la langue française est un atout majeur. Bien que l’anglais soit la lingua franca actuelle, le français offre une profondeur culturelle et historique inégalée. Langue de travail à la Cour Internationale de Justice et à l’ONU, la maîtrise du français permet aux diplomates de haut rang d’exercer leur métier avec une finesse incomparable. L’Alliance Française de La Haye soutient ce pluralisme linguistique au sein des organisations internationales de la ville, renforçant ainsi les liens avec les 88 pays membres de l’Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie.”
Le 8 mars 2024, a la résidence française lors d’un débat animé par Hélène Pichon à l’occasion de la Journée des droits de la femme.
Les droits sur les photos appartiennent au photographe officiel de la residence de l’ambassade de France, @Leslie HONDEBRINK-HERMER.
“Les Alliances Françaises aux Pays-Bas mettent en place divers projets pour faciliter l’apprentissage du français pour les diplomates et les professionnels à La Haye. Elles offrent des formations en présentiel et à distance, en direct ou asynchrones, rendant l’apprentissage du français accessible à tous. Elles proposent également un riche programme culturel et artistique tout au long de l’année, permettant la pratique de la langue française dans des contextes variés et stimulants.”
Enfin, les Alliances Françaises des Pays-Bas renforcent constamment leur coopération avec les institutions diplomatiques basées à La Haye. Elles disposent de budgets d’accompagnement et innovent pédagogiquement pour répondre aux besoins spécifiques des diplomates et des fonctionnaires internationaux. Diplomat Magazine soutient cette initiative en offrant une rubrique en français dédiée, permettant de présenter régulièrement la richesse de l’agenda culturel francophone aux Pays-Bas aux lecteurs.
La Directrice invite tous les lecteurs à découvrir la Cité Internationale de la Langue Française à Villers-Cotterêts, qui sera au cœur du prochain sommet de la Francophonie en octobre 2024.
International relations are nowadays characterised by major changes that started at the end of the 80s with the fall of the Berlin Wall. Indeed, the end of the cold war was marked by the dislocation of the two main political blocks, namely the Soviet Union and the Western World. Such a dislocation resulted in the marginalization of the post-war multilateral system embodied in the United Nations, and the standstill of the multilateral trade negotiations in the late 90s in the context of the World Trade Organisation. New lines of political thought have been facing each other since then, while reshaping the post-cold war world in a number of fragmented and variable sub-blocks of countries.
The United States decided to put itself first by concentrating on its internal affairs, while withdrawing from international affairs.
Europe, the old continent, looks for an efficient strategy towards autonomy from the United States. Europe also tries, not without difficulty, to create a more cohesive internal and external political approach. The reality is however evolving rather more towards fragmentation of Europe in favour of European National fragmented interests. Such a fragmentation is the natural consequence of the decadence of the European Institutional and collective actions to the advantage of individual Sates actions and interests. In sum, what seemed to be a structured and coherent European Union block fighting for the promotion of its economic and political values all over the world has somehow become an alliance at variable geometry both internally and externally. The disorganisation of the leadership results in a chaotic and unpredictable European External and Internal action.
Thereof, the empty influence spaces left on the international relations scene has given new international actors the opportunity to emerge.
Meanwhile, the fragmentation of the European Institutions has also impacted the EU-USA relations within NATO, and affected the security and peace sphere. Security issues have been on and off on the European agenda.
In this context, Russia that has lost its empire in the 80s looks now for a new power game. In spite of the disruption of the Soviet Union, Russia attempts either by influence or by force to exercise power in its ancient affiliate countries. Russia that was supposed to be defeated with the fall of the Berlin Wall takes back its role of opponent to the Western World on the international scene at least as it concerns the international affairs philosophy. Thus, creating a tension aimed at restoring its power in the world.
The group of emerging and developing economies that constitute a new variable block with a large portion of population employed in agriculture have emerged as new actors in the world’s geo-political discourses. At the head of this block on the international scene, there is China. The shaky international leadership context has indeed given China a new space. China’s communist past combined with its market-based economic strategy gives it a particular position.
China is The One that can communicate to Russia. China is also The One that can have an influence on the Western economic and political scene as China owns a big part of Western Foreign Debt
China embeds a horizontal strategy in both its trade and development policies, while producing at low wages. Its production system coupled with its pragmatic political approach has reshaped the international power structure. The top-down approach of the Western World faces now the competition created by the horizontal win-win approach proposed by China in both developing and industrialized countries.
Indeed, as a result of the decline of the Western World global hegemony based on market access and economic and social liberalism as a means to ensure economic growth and promote economic development, the vision promoted by China’s discourse, centred on the protection of livelihoods and local sovereign choices finds new adepts. Furthermore, China has successfully attempted to promote a trade-off approach to international cooperation during the last 20 years. A cooperation that does not interfere in internal affairs of partner countries as it has often reproached to the Western countries involved in international cooperation.
As the developing countries leader, China positions itself as the spoke country for the poor. As a new world powerful economic actor China plays as the guarantor of the Western Economic stability. China positions itself as the bridge between the rich and the poor. It is representing a different hegemonic game that only changes in its discourse, while still pursuing its own interests and influence zones. Such a situation poses the question of the values that the international regime wants to embrace. Indeed, this changing world results in an increased number of conflicts – be new or historical conflicts.
The dislocation of the traditional leaders of the international relations has definitely created a chaotic and unpredictable scenario. Chaos has in some cases been chosen as a political strategy to disrupt the post-1945 international regime. Such a disruption has benefitted new actors, and given space to new lines of thought. These new lines of thought have attacked the existing international framework but has not yet succeeded in creating a new regime. The increasing unbalance of power and the lack of leadership on the international political scene is risky.
The reduction by choice of leadership of the United States has indeed resulted in the weakening of the values emerged as a result of the dramatic experience of Second World War, namely freedom of thought and freedom of speech to mention only a few. We are now facing a much more authoritarian world with force used as a means to manage the political arena. Dialogue seems to be a rather consuming exercise that has left its place to the use of force. Force is no longer seen as the last option but rather the opening act for political dialogue. Nationalism and individual interests are now at the centre of the political game. This trend is taking the world to instability and conflict.
The peoples of the world are more and more questioning the existing system. People’s needs and expectations are not met. The new emerged actors, such as China have given the hope of a possible change in the present international system without fundamentally questioning its rationale but rather trying to rip a slate of the cake.
The struggle for influence among countries has not succeeded in building a peaceful and stable world. Citizens will have to face the challenge of building a new era of peace and stability worldwide.
The Malaysian Embassy in the Netherlands organised The First Malaysia Fair to showcase Malaysia’s splendour, including agriculture, tourism, cuisine, and export.
The fair attracted various components of Dutch society. What initially began as MATRADE and the diaspora’s Malaysian annual spring food fair on the embassy grounds has been catapulted to the Westfield Mall Netherlands in Leidschendam, The Hague, 27 – 28 July 2024.
The fair’s program featured a wide range of Malaysian fruits and products, cultural performances, dances, songs, music, prizes, and a trip to Malaysia. The event aimed to showcase the diverse offerings of the nation.
Several distinguished guests attended the launching ceremony, including ambassadors and diplomats from ASEAN member states based in The Hague, Dutch government officials, and representatives from industries such as halal authority, tourism, and Diplomat Magazine.
H.E. Roseli Abdul, Ambassador of Malaysia.
Addressing the audience, H.E. Ambassador Roseli Abdul highlighted Malaysia’s tourism potential and encouraged guests to explore the country’s diverse attractions and experience the warmth and hospitality of the Malaysian people firsthand.
During the fair, exhibitors, including Aqina Holdings Sdn. Bhd, KULIM (Malaysia) Berhad, 3BUMI Trading Sdn.Bhd and the Malaysian Pineapple Industry Board (LPNM) showcased Malaysian fresh pineapple MD2 and food products. They attracted Dutch visitors with samples, encouraging them to explore new flavours.
Alex Tan, General Manager of AQINA Farm.
Mr. Alex Tan, General Manager of AQINA Farm, highlighted Aqina fruits, particularly pineapples. He supplies MD2 pineapples, dry snacks, and pineapple seeds. Tan has been running a pineapple farm since 2004 and exports his produce to Turkey, Japan, Iran, Korea, local markets, and other parts of the world.
In 2015, AQINA received the prestigious MYGAP Certificate from the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security of Malaysia (MAFS), an evidence to its environmental friendliness, commitment to employees’ welfare and reassurance of the high quality of Malaysian produce.
Mr. Alex Tan travelled to the Netherlands to introduce his pineapples and other fruits to the country. His packed schedule indicates success in his endeavours. In collaboration with TUI Nederland, the tourism booth provided information about Malaysia’s travel destinations. The fair introduced the MAHA Go Global 2024 initiative for business expansion and innovation in agriculture and horticulture. MAHA 2024 will occur from 11-22 September in MAEPS, Serdang, Selangor. The well-attended two-day fair ran from 27 to 28 July 2024 at Westfield Mall of the Netherlands.
H.E. Mr. Huong Nam Ngo, Ambassador off Vietnam, H.E. Mr. Roseli Abdul, Ambassador of Malaysia, H.E. Mr. Asi Mamanee, Ambassador of Thailand and Mr. Jarie Osias, First Secretary Consul, Embassy of the Philippines at the First Malaysian Fair Netherlands 2024
The First Malaysia Fair in the Netherlands is a great success and is expected to be repeated annually. It reached various sections of Dutch society and energised the Malaysian diaspora in the Netherlands.
The Embassy of Malaysia invites you to join them at the next edition of The First Malaysia Fair and experience the splendour of Malaysia first-hand.
Everyone who attended The First Malaysia Fair 2024 was enthused and eagerly anticipating the next edition. We hope to see you there!
France renews its voluntary contribution to the ICC Trust Fund for Victims to support survivors of sexual and gender-based violence and rehabilitation of former child-soldiers
The Trust Fund for Victims (TFV) at the International Criminal Court (ICC) is pleased to announce a voluntary contribution of EUR 140,000 from the Government of France, a State Party to the ICC, to support survivors of sexual and gender-based violence and train child soldiers through TFV programs.
In welcoming the contribution, Kevin Kelly, member of the TFV Board of Directors stated, “Globally there is a shocking rise of violence against children and of violence of a sexual or gender based nature committed against them, and against women and men. The TFV programs prioritize responses to support survivors of these heinous crimes. The Board of Directors welcomes critical support from France to continue our mandate in delivering reparative justice for victims of crimes under the jurisdiction of the ICC .”
HE François Alabrune, Ambassador of France to the Kingdom of the Netherlands said, “Actions in favor of victims, aimed at recreating the conditions of a normal life for them, are an essential dimension of international criminal justice. This is why France is renewing its contribution of 140,000 euros to the International Criminal Court’s Trust Fund for Victims in 2024. This support will particularly benefit victims of sexual or gender-based violence and the rehabilitation of former child soldiers.”
France, a state party to the Rome Statute since 9 June 2000, has been supporting the ICC Trust Fund for Victims through annual voluntary contributions since 2005 with a total amount of over EUR 1.7 million.
UN(26.07.2024) – The Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, Reem Alsalem, welcomed the landmark judgment of the European Court of Human Rightsvalidating the French law that criminalises the purchase of sexual acts and provides support to survivors of prostitution.
The Court ruled on a case concerning Law No. 2016-444 titled M. A. et autres c. France, in which applicants claimed that the law contravenes articles 2, 3, and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights on the right to life, prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment and the right to privacy. The Court only examined the application under article 8, and rejected the allegations in a unanimous ruling, clarifying that there was no violation of the article in question.
“The Court’s ruling is in line with that of the French Constitutional Council, which validated the constitutionality of the law. It is also consistent with the recommendations made in my statement, quoted in the judgment,” Alsalem said. “I particularly welcome the Court’s observation of the combined positive effect of decriminalising prostituted persons and criminalising the purchase of sexual acts, which helps reverse the balance of power by positioning prostituted persons as victims and enabling them to denounce buyers of sexual acts in the event of violence.”
Alsalem said the ruling had also taken note of the positive impact of the law on protecting prostituted persons, specifically because the criminalisation of buying of sexual acts was adopted as part of a comprehensive approach that aims to repeal any legal provision which might encourage prostitution without prohibiting it; introduce measures to protect prostituted people; take steps to prevent individuals from becoming prostitutes; and support the rehabilitation of prostituted people who wished to exit prostitution.
“The Court’s ruling is a major victory for women and girls in prostitution, who expressed concern about the form of impunity for their exploiters being enshrined,” she said. “It is also a victory for feminist and grassroots associations that assist victims, witness the violence, and have expressed their strong support for the French law.”
The expert said the ruling “sends a strong signal” to the Member States of the Council of Europe and confirms the consistency of the abolitionist approach with international human rights law, particularly the 1949 Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women.
“It is part of a collective awakening to the violence and discrimination inherent in the prostitution system brought about by paradigm shifts in favour of the abolitionist model within various countries; the adoption of the European Parliament resolution and the presentation of my report – the first report on prostitution to be discussed at the human rights council. It describes prostitution as a system of exploitation and violence against women and girls and called for the adoption of the abolitionist model.
The Special Rapporteurs, Independent Experts and Working Groups are part of what is known as the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council. Special Procedures, the largest body of independent experts in the UN Human Rights system, is the general name of the Council’s independent fact-finding and monitoring mechanisms that address either specific country situations or thematic issues in all parts of the world. Special Procedures’ experts work on a voluntary basis; they are not UN staff and do not receive a salary for their work. They are independent from any government or organization and serve in their individual capacity.
By Barrington Roy Schiller (#BarringtonRoySchiller)
It is election season, and elections have already been held in the European Union while in the UK, a new government is ready to take office while TV channels fill their 24/7 schedules discussing all the elections on both sides of the Atlantic with uninformed commentaries and discuss Polls, the likely outcomes, future Prime Ministers, and Presidents. However, participating in these elections is not compulsory, so nothing is certain until the votes have been counted, and even then, some may contest the “count”.
However, despite news anchors throwing the words “Prime Minister” and “President” in the same sentence, they are elected heads of political parties, and most of their electorate have little understanding of how the systems that put them in their positions differ, and regularly confuse the Parliamentary and Presidential systems.
This Briefing aims to discuss the benefits and disbenefits of adopting either a presidential executive system or a parliamentary executive system for a new state. The choice of executive system is particularly critical when considering constitutional design, and both systems have equal legitimacy and rivalling authoritative sources, making it difficult to resolve any dispute. so, for practical purposes, I will, therefore, initially examine and present the salient points of each system to enable the reader to come to their own conclusion about which system is preferential for their particular leadership style.
In each system, we find three main components, the legislature, the executive and the judiciary, and each is of equal importance in representing the people and enabling the efficiency of a democratic system, but in both systems, it is generally considered wise to separate the powers of each of the components. Although the roots of the idea of separating these powers can be found in the works of Aristotle, modern writers like Jean Bodin in the 16th century, John Locke in the 17th century and Montesquieu, the French jurist, who discussed it in detail in his book “the spirit of laws “(published in 1748) all seemed to believe that “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely “so power should be spread between the components to enable a system of checks and balances.
Leadership should, therefore, initially consider not if there should be checks and balances and a separation of powers but more the quantity they wish to have in the executive system of the new state when examining the systems in more detail to fully understand the implications of their decision.
Scholars, such as Juan Linz, claim that “A presidential system generally has more checks and balances but tends not to enable change as rapidly as that of a parliamentary system”2. so the new state leadership should not only consider the quantity of checks and balances they wish to have but also how easy they wish to make a change of leadership possible.
It should also be borne in mind that although I have been asked to evaluate only a presidential or a parliamentary system there are actually multiple variations which cannot be completely ignored. Some examples of these are: Absolute monarchies, Constitutional monarchies, executive presidency linked to a parliament, Full presidential republics, Parliamentary constitutional monarchies, Parliamentary republics, Presidential republics and Semi-presidential republics. In some States, the constitution even stipulates just one party or even a coalition, and in others, it has even suspended the provision of government.
In simple terms, the electorate in a Presidential system elects a Person as a President, whereas in a Parliamentary system, the electorate elects a political party, and the members of that party choose a leader to become Prime Minister. This often leads to the electorate claiming that the person was unelected by them.
Analysis
In a full presidential system (as in the USA), the President is both the head of state and the head of the executive (government). There is no prime minister, although if there ever was to be one, they would serve purely “at the pleasure of the president”. When the US Constitution was written the essential consideration of the system was the separation of powers between those who make the laws (the legislature) and those who enforce the laws (the executive), so the Constitution of the USA divided the power amongst the branches to prevent any President, as the leader, from becoming like George 3rd of England who they had seen as tyrannical. Power was therefore distributed between several branches, with laws made by “the legislature”, the executive (the branch that undertakes the daily administration and execution and enforcement) and another branch to interpret the laws, “the judiciary”. The President can, however, use decrees of executive orders to pass and enforce certain decisions so the executive, which consists of the President, his office or multiple offices, can commonly become the originator of regulations, and the President can veto legislation which he disproves of being passed and becoming law.
When considering which system to adopt, it should also be considered that as well as an executive branch, any new State would also need other main actors. The president holds office for a fixed term, and it is customary for the President to also become the “Head of state” as well as “commander in chief”. This combination gives the President a larger impact on the State’s foreign policy than a Prime Minister of a parliament would have as it is the “head of State” that receives the Ambassadors from foreign states. A President does not choose the legislature, but the legislature can block certain top positions he proposes, and his choices for top positions like Judges also need the senate’s approval. Once approved, however they can only be removed for gross misconduct like the President, who can only be removed before the end of his fixed period if impeached. The legislature can also not be removed before the end of their fixed term, but there are no limits as to how often they can be re-elected, unlike a President.
When comparing the Presidential system with a Parliamentary system (such as that of the UK, in which the monarch does not exercise power), we find some overlap as decisions of the executive (the government) can be affected by the whips ordering their opposition members of parliament to vote in a particular manner and tow the party line, but there are also major differences. The Prime minister is neither head of state nor commander in chief. It is “His Majesty’s government” that he leads after selecting ministers from the legislature (parliament), but she is the head of state and commander in chief, and she asks him to form a government and refers to it as her government in the King’s speech.
In the parliamentary system, a British prime minister now also has a fixed term and can only be removed by a vote of no-confidence, but in that case, new elections for the legislature must be held, not just for a new Prime Minister. Although parliament can be removed by the head of state at any time, this happens in reality only if requested by the Prime Minister. The UK parliamentary system is referred to as the Westminster system and is more adversarial than other types. Seating is arranged with Members of parliament facing each other like choir benches in the knave of a church, and the plenary has more influence than committees. The Franchise elects a named candidate, and although the UK uses a “first past the post” system, other voting systems, such as proportional representation, are also possible and considered by those who get fewer seats in Parliament as being “unfair” as it does not reflect the total percentage of votes they receive. In the Western European model, which is used in Germany and Spain, seats are arranged in a semi-circle, so it is less adversarial, and the franchise uses proportional representation more than in the Westminster model. In the Netherlands and Sweden, ministers resign when elected to ensure an even stronger separation of powers.
It also appears appropriate to mention the fifth republic of France, a system which seems barely presidential nor parliamentary but is referred to as semi-presidential and in which the President accepts a reduction in daily government in return for a larger foreign policy influence.
Cautionary Notes
Juan Linz provides an influential view that Presidentialism is more likely to lead to regime collapse or at least political instability.1 based on the developments in Latin America during the 1960s and 70s.
Separating powers makes the assumption that the three branches are equal and can result in the government not being able to work together efficiently and can result in deadlocks, which can possibly cause a standstill or shutdown in the government, as has been seen in approving even the budget in the USA.
The British Philosopher John Stuart Mill (1806 – 1873) predicted that separating powers would cause the legislature, executive and judiciary to compete for importance, seeing only their own organ as important.
It can also be argued that unless the executive has judicial powers, officers can feel insecure while carrying out their duties.
The head of state need not necessarily be the de facto leader or the person who oversees the administration or matters of state but can be chosen to carry out a purely ceremonial and representative role (3) and act more as a symbol of the state than the actual head of government who is usually the de-facto overseer regarding all state matters and their administration.
In the 21st century, society has changed considerably since the original works of Montesquieu, and in this day and age, we cannot ignore the influences of modern civil institutions on government, which were not relevant in 1787 at the time of the signing of the US Constitution whether they be for a presidential or parliamentary system.
Fiscal Considerations
Whichever system is chosen, it should be borne in mind that it is the legislature that has the power of the purse and not the executive in both systems.
Conclusion and Recommended Action
To conclude, it would appear that even though Presidential systems with their emphasis on separation of powers generally appear to be more unstable and more likely to result in a breakdown of a regime, there is no empirical evidence outside of Western Europe and Latin America due to the quantity of differing presidential systems and parliamentary executive systems in the form of monarchies so having presented both systems and in particular the benefits and disbenefits and checks and balances in both systems only the report reader and decision-maker can decide how fit for their purpose adopting one system or another may be for the new state.
REFERENCES
1.Juan Linz. 1990. ‘The Perils of Presidentialism.’ Journal of Democracy 1(1): 51-69; Juan Linz and Arturo Valenzuela. Eds.1994. The Failure of Presidential Democracy: The Case of Latin America. The Johns Hopkins Press; Juan Linz and Alfred Stephan. 1996. Problems of Democratic Consolidation. Johns Hopkins Press; Arendt Lijphart. 1996. Ed. Presidential v. Parliamentary Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alfred Stepan and Cindy Skach. 1993. ‘Constitutional frameworks and democratic consolidation: Parliamentarism and presidentialism.
Arendt Lijphart. 1996. Ed. Presidential v. Parliamentary Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fred W. Riggs. 1997. ‘Presidentialism versus parliamentarism: Implications for representativeness and legitimacy.’ International Political Science Review, 18 (3): 253-278.
Giovanni Sartori. 1996. Comparative Constitutional Engineering: An inquiry into structures, incentives and outcomes. London: Macmillan.
José Cheibub, Adam Przeworski, and S. M. Saiegh. 2004. ‘Government coalitions and legislative success under presidentialism and parliamentarism.’ British Journal Of Political Science 34: 565;
Norris, P. 2008. Driving democracy. chapter 6 pp1 – 31. Cambridge University Press.
